Bart Busschots wrote:
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
What do you mean "so what", Frank? If one is new to the java web
application space, why on earth should one start using a framework
like Struts Classic that (a) is not state of the art and (b) is not
going to be developed any further?
WHY?
Because it does what you need? Because it does MORE than you need?
Bart,
I am currently in the market for a digital video camera. I have never
owned such a gadget before. I have not yet done much research into this
product category, but I take as a given that a lot of progress has been
happening in the last few years. Newer models are both far less
weighty/bulky than those of a few years ago, and more featureful. And
probably easier to use as well.
Now, I have little doubt that any model that was state of the art 4
years ago does what I need -- does MORE than what I need. However, I
just take as a given that I will try to get something that is currently
state of the art, not a 4-year-old model.
This *is* common sense.
Because there is a much larger community out there with the skills you
need? Because there are more online resources to help you when you get
stuck?
There are plenty of online resources for things like Spring and Webwork
and plenty of people to help you when you get stuck.
Because the platform is stable, reliable and tested in the real
world? I could go on but I think you get the point. The bleeding edge is
NOT a good place to be on a production system! If it ain't broke, don't
fix it!
The main competitors to Struts, such as Spring MVC and Webwork are not
bleeding edge. For example, in the case of Webwork, well known java web
applications, such as Jive forums, Confluence, and JIRA, are built on
top of Webwork. We are not talking about bleeding edge technologies.
I get very annoyed when people insist that you have to be at the
bleeding edge of everything or you're being stupid. That's just not a
real world view of things, it's an idealized view from an ivory tower IMO.
Bart, if I already owned a digital video camera that was 4 years behind
the state of the art, and it did everything I needed, I would probably
not bother to buy a new one.
However, if I am in the market for a new one, and I have never owned
such a gadget before (and that is my exact case) I will naturally try
to buy something that is roughly the current state of the art (within
the parameters of my budget, of course.)
Now, that some huckster salesman some place tries to sell me a model
they have lying around that is 4 years out of date is understandable.
The guy is on commission and has to eat. What the excuse of people like
you and Frank and others is, I really don't know....
Does Struts as it exists today serve a great many people very well?
Yes. Does everyone need every single new feature available out
there? No. You know, I've had my complaints as well, but
ultimately, if the offering is doing the job for so many, how does
how far behind the state of the art it is really matter?
What you're saying is senseless IMO. In this discussion, the onus is
not on me to explain why somebody new to the java web app space should
not use Struts 1.x. The onus is on the other side of the debate to
explain why somebody should use it, given that it is (a) quite far
behind the state of the art and (b) is not going to be developed any
further.
See above points and it IS being developed further, 1.3 is on the way!
Bah, humbug. You're talking about something that is, at best, an
incremental refinement to a product that is something around 4 years out
of date. Whatever improvements it offers are really only of interest to
people who already have some sunk investment in Struts 1.x. Clearly,
someone new to this space should be looking for a more state-of-the-art
alternative.
Besides, Struts Action 2.0 is on the way (!) and that *is* Webwork.
Isn't that a more sensible starting point for someone new to this space?
Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
The onus is on you to explain why somebody should not do the
common-sensical thing of looking for something that is state of the
art and that will have an ongoing development effort behind it. Such a
thing could be Webwork a.k.a. Struts Action 2, or *maybe* this Shale
thing or it could be something else.
Looking for state of the art is not common-sensical! In the real world
there are many more factors to consider than just wither or not you use
the latest bleeding edge technology. Stability and a proven track record
count for a lot as do the availability of skills and help and
documentation and books etc. You are looking at just a single factor and
assuming it is the only factor when it simply isn't in the real world.
Bart.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
