The issue was not using the same code base, not a better apple. The issue was substituting a code base which was foreign to the very conceptual foundation of Struts, substituting an orange for an apple. But, you probably knew this.
Struts needs to do a major shift. I think "lip service" is not helpful. I think that Struts should get uptown. On 6/12/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
t to upgrade the underlying framework to take advantage of new features. If SAF2 doesn't even pay lip service to a migration story (which'd be pretty ironic of the lambasting that Shale got over wanting the "Struts" brand :-), then you're not giving the existing users much incentive to migrate to SAF2 versus any other framework. Craig > > > In the field, it seems like that once a Struts application hits > > production, it continues to use the same version. A new application > > might use 1.2, but the old ones continue to plug along on 1.1. If it > > ain't broke, why fix it? > > > > -Ted. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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~
