Yes. I know what stability means and what changing means, Alexandre. I don't have to go to a dictionary. I only go to a dictionary when I don't know what a word means.
Let me try and get you to see the context. I was saying that getting the questions answered about what went wrong was important because people who were to use Struts need to see it was stable. This certainly did not mean that they needed to see that it did not change. If you think those are contradictory, then I leave you with that insight. Myself, I think this change to the webwork platform promises stability if and only if there are lessons learned. If that is contradictory for you, then you can have your logic and I will keep my own. On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Stability : Relatively unchanging, permanent; firmly fixed or established, > > Of course, it usually only refers to the framework API. It doesn't > have anything to do with improvements or not, changing is changing for > the best or the worst. > > "There is nothing incompatible between being -->stable<-- and being > innovative and > -->changing<--" is totally contradictory according to your favorite > dictionary. > > > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Again, Alexandre, how are these contradictory? Oh, LOL, I see what you > are > > thinking, if I can guess. You think that code improvement and migration > are > > unstable. Unstable is when you cannot count on a product for the long > run. > > This means stability embraces change and improvement, keeping up with > the > > Jones. Look at the big picture. > > > > Stability is important. That does not mean you don't improve. There is > > nothing incompatible between being stable and being innovative and > > changing. In fact, if a code base does not keep up, it is unstable. A > code > > base is not stable if you cannot count on it for the future. > > > > On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Yesterday : > > > "The stability of a platform like Struts is a big deal" > > > Today : > > > "Backward compatibility is never a reason to trash a product. You go > > > through a process of deprecation." > > > > > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I have no idea, Alexandre, why you think this is a > contradiction. Could > > > you > > > > please point that out? > > > > > > > > On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > You lack memory Dakota, here's what you just wrote yesterday : > > > > > > > > > > "The hullabaloo, Larry, is about the stability of the platform > with a > > > > > bunch > > > > > of committers who don't appear to be up to the job and who are not > > > willing > > > > > to look at what went wrong. The stability of a platform like > Struts > > > is a > > > > > big deal. This is a time to decide to go with or to get off the > > > Struts > > > > > wagon. How the committers respond has a lot to do with this." > > > > > > > > > > You just contradicted yourself... But you are so superior to us > mere > > > > > mortals that I am probably wrong again. > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You > > > > > > > toadies to the process are the ones that always start this > > > crap. The > > > > > truth > > > > > > > is that you don't know shit. If you did, you would be all > over > > > this > > > > > > > question. Backward compatibility is never a reason to trash a > > > > > product. You > > > > > > > go through a process of deprecation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't bother about him Bart. I said it and I will say it > again, > > > he > > > > > is > > > > > > > > a troll. I tried to have a constructive discussion with him > > > several > > > > > > > > times. It always ends up in personal attacks (go read some > books > > > and > > > > > > > > come back...) but he is the one never backing up his claims. > I > > > am > > > > > all > > > > > > > > for freedom of speech and CONSRUCTIVE CRITICISM but I think > > > people > > > > > > > > have been REALLY tolerant with him. I can't count how many > times > > > he > > > > > > > > bashed Craig freely or any other commiters. It sounds like > > > jalousy > > > > > to > > > > > > > > me. Dakota, this list is owned by Apache and you are a guess > > > here. > > > > > It > > > > > > > > is not an absolute right. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Honestly, I begin to think Shale should move to another > place > > > > > because > > > > > > > > the amount of noise on this list is terrible. I don't write > a > > > lot on > > > > > > > > this list but I do read it a lot and this noise is getting > > > really > > > > > out > > > > > > > > of control. Thank to 2 guys who have decided Apache doesn't > fit > > > > > their > > > > > > > > point of view and therefore anybody who don't think the same > > > > > way are > > > > > > > > wrong . Here's a clue : you can take the code, evolve it and > > > start > > > > > > > > your own community then quite BUGGING US with your childish > > > fights > > > > > > > > since you will be so successful. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > By the way, for those who may believe those guys, Struts > 1.xdidn't > > > > > > > > not evolve as fast as WebWork for one reason : API Backward > > > > > > > > compatibilit, something very important to frameworks. This > is > > > one of > > > > > > > > the reason this community is so huge. Is it that hard to > > > understand > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > For instance, it has been well known since a long time that > > > sending > > > > > an > > > > > > > > HttpServletRequest's instance to actions was a bad idea and > a > > > > > neutral > > > > > > > > context object should have been used instead but it hasn't > been > > > > > > > > changed to keep the API consistant. Hence the need for a > version > > > 2.0 > > > > > . > > > > > > > > WebWork technically already gots it right but always lacked > > > (from > > > > > what > > > > > > > > I heard) a big user community, something Struts has always > > > enjoyed > > > > > > > > because of its commitment to backward compatibility. So both > > > > > > > > frameworks win in this merge especially given the strong > > > competition > > > > > > > > coming from components-oriented frameworks. Technical > excellence > > > is > > > > > > > > not the only success factor. Only idealists think this way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/30/06, Bart Busschots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dakota Jack wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Dion, you are obviously really green. Please read a bit > and > > > then > > > > > come > > > > > > > > > >back. Do you have any idea about architecture and design > and > > > > > testing > > > > > > > > > >issues? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is an example of the kind of post this list could do > > > without. > > > > > The > > > > > > > > > above post basically boils down to: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "you disagree with me so you must be uneducated, go read > up > > > some > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > then come talk with the big boys" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry but that is just insulting and most un-helpful. > > > Jack, > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > explain your point of view so us mere > > > > > > > > > mortals can actually learn something rather than being all > > > smug > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > superior on people who dissagree with > > > > > > > > > you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bart. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Alexandre Poitras > > > > > > > > Québec, Canada > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on > its > > > > > back." > > > > > > > ~Dakota Jack~ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Alexandre Poitras > > > > > > Québec, Canada > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Alexandre Poitras > > > > > Québec, Canada > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its > > > back." > > > > ~Dakota Jack~ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Alexandre Poitras > > > Québec, Canada > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its > back." > > ~Dakota Jack~ > > > > > > > -- > Alexandre Poitras > Québec, Canada > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~
