Please see my comments below:
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
Ted Husted wrote:
On 4/18/06, Phil Zoio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd be happy to pass Strecks on to Struts itself if the community
really
wanted it, but I don't see that as essential to its existence in any
way.
What we look for is a community forming around the codebase. We don't
just want code, we want people who are committed to maintaining the
code over the long term.
Yes, but if that is the case, doesn't that mean that you have failed
utterly and abysmally? After all, we have a situation in which the
Struts 1.x codebase is basically being abandoned and you are bringing
in a codebase that was, heretofore, that of a competing project.
You won't be surprised to hear that I also think that taking WebWork
into Struts was a big mistake.
Its hard to see how either existing Struts or WebWork users benefit from it:
- Struts users stand to lose from the unnecessarily rapid demise of the
existing framework and because it prevents the chances of projects which
can move it forward, like Strecks and others, from gaining acceptance in
the future
- I can't see how it works for WebWork users, who invested in the
framework when it was not so fashionable and are rewarded with the
tedious job of having to update their applications for fit in with the
Struts package names. A lot of the developer effort that could be going
in to adding features, etc. instead needs to be going in to updating
documentation and creating compatibility layers
The only possible user "benefit" I could imagine being argued is that
Struts users are "introduced" to a better framework without having to do
the hard sell on their pro-Struts management. But this is a pretty weak
argument at best, in my opinion.
So what is this about your "commitment to maintaining the code over
the long term"?
Not just one person, but a community of "likely suspects" who will
step and and volunteer if the creator of
the code loses interest.
Doesn't all this beg the question completely? If you and your
collaborators are not interested in developing the Struts 1.x codebase
any further, and Phil and maybe others are, why should you not just
let them come in and do what they will?
I mean, as regards Struts 1.x, you are not proposing to do anything
with it really, right? If other people have a plan for modernizing it
and making it better, why should you not just open the door and say:
"Okay, show us what you can do."
What is there to lose? AFAICS, the only alternative you are proposing
wrt Struts 1.x is simply to abandon it.
I think it woud be way premature to talk about Strecks code being added
to Struts proper. One thing which would help greatly would be one or two
links from the Struts sites so that Struts 1.x users who haven't read
the TSS article or these posts would still have a way of finding out
about it
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
