On 3/29/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You need to pay attention to the credibility of who is doing the > "describing" that you are referring to.
I just go by what the insiders have published here. If the insiders have no credibility, let's turn off the lights and go home. When the WebWork deal was announced it was made clear that WebWork was so much better that there was no point in trying to shoehorn it in the current codebase, but a new Struts Action 2 was going to be created that was going to be, essentially, WebWork. The current Struts, so bad that it could not be fixed, was going to be re-christened as Struts Action 1 and, for all intents and purposes, mothballed. Of course, it was not put this bluntly, but that was the gist of it. Now, to me this qualifies more as a takeover than a merger; a revolution not evolution. Which, by the way, is fine with me. What is not so fine is trying to cling to the Struts name because of its value as a brand, even though the software is completely different. If you are now interested in JSF, more power to you, just let go of the Struts name. If the other committers think that WebWork is much better, they should join the WebWork project and leave the reins of the Struts project with someone else. Names that confuse are not very useful. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
