You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@struts.apache.org by Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org> on 2005/12/14 21:22:07 UTC
[ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
14 Dec 2005 - To give JavaServer Faces developers a head start on building
scalable web applications for the enterprise, Apache Struts now offers the
Shale Framework. Like the original "Struts Action Framework", Shale provides
developers with a front controller, and several other components, to provide
the "invisible underpinnings that hold an application together".
"When JavaServer Faces arrived," explains the Struts website, "our
development community chose to 'make new friends but keep the old'. Some of
us want (or need) to stick with the original request-based framework. Others
are ready to switch to an component-based framework that builds on
JavaServer Faces. We offer both frameworks because we have volunteers to
create and maintain both frameworks."
Shale is based on the recently standardized JavaServer Faces APIs, and
focuses on adding value, rather than redundantly implementing features that
JSF already provides. Shale will run on any compliant JSF implementation,
including the one being developed by the Apache MyFaces project. It also
includes many features that Struts users appreciate, such as supporting
client side validation and the Tiles framework.
Struts Shale was discussed by Craig McClanahan in a talk at ApacheCon on
Tuesday, December 13, 2005, entitled "Shale: The Next Struts??". Slides from
the talk are available online [
http://people.apache.org/~craigmcc/apachecon-2005-shale.pdf].
For more about Shale, visit the Struts Shale website [
http://struts.apache.org/struts-shale/].
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com>.
On 12/16/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> Based on your comments at the BOF ...
Was anyone taking notes? (Or did you save the envelopes and napkins
you were scribbling on? ;) ) I'd love to hear how the presentations
went, as well as what was discussed afterwards.
Maybe a new thread is in order, this is all getting buried under the
announcement.
--
Wendy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org>.
On 12/16/05, Patrick Lightbody <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This sounds familiar :)
>
> I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
> presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
>
>
> http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
>
> Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
> Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and clear
> on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
> frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
Based on your comments at the BOF, I submitted a request to change that
title (which had been submitted even before the ApacheCon talk :-).
Patrick
Craig
On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at significant
> > conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next
> Struts",
> > you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
> > baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have read
> all
> > about the Trojan Horse.
> >
> > On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a subproject
> > > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
> > >
> > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
> > >
> > > -- Paul
> > >
> > >
> > > Craig
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> back."
> > ~Dakota Jack~
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Paul Benedict <pa...@yahoo.com>.
John Lovitz.. gotta love it.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
Yah, that's the ticket. That's it. Sarcasm! Yah.
On 12/17/05, Preston Crawford <me...@prestoncrawford.com> wrote:
>
> was using it for effect. I was trying to be over the top.
>
> Apparently both of you missed the sarcasm.
>
> Preston
>
> Also educated in a blue state, whatever that means.
>
> > You said "nefarious". That is a strawman. I said I don't disparage
> > Craig,
> > and I don't. Let me make it clear that so far as I know Craig is a
> decent
> > and honorable man. This is about principle, not about personalities. I
> > cannot stand the President's policies and priorities as I don't like
> > Craig's, but I think the President is a good and honorable man.
> >
> > Let me say do say in your favor, Sean, that you certainly used to show
> > huge
> > restraint of pen and tongue, since you did not comment on the Struts
> lists
> > for three years after your recently disclosed active involvement.
> >
> > On 12/16/05, Preston Crawford <me...@prestoncrawford.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I have never had a concern about the "umbrella" idea, which is the
> >> latest
> >> > description of what is happening. I would in fact encourage that and
> >> > cannot
> >> > see any problem with it. However, I pay more attention to people's
> >> feet
> >> > than their lips. "Is Shale the Next Struts?" is the feet. The
> >> community
> >> > is
> >> > not served by the whole panoply of things similar to that which have
> >> been
> >> > fast and furious over the year plus. If there were a consistent
> >> message
> >> > and
> >> > this change of tune when addressing the "outer world" was not the
> >> norm,
> >> > then
> >> > I would have no qualms. However, with the data and the facts the way
> >> they
> >> > are, I think it is naive to expect that Craig really is interested in
> >> > community. I do not disparage Craig in saying that. He doesn't have
> >> to
> >> > be
> >> > interested in anything. I just don't feel like being an unwitting
> >> toady.
> >>
> >> ?????
> >>
> >> Craig is so nefarious...... Good thing you're not unwitting... that
> >> you're
> >> on your guard.
> >>
> >> Craig has been helping people on the Struts list for years. I first
> >> adopted and learned Struts when it was beta. Pre version 1.0. And he
> was
> >> helpful then and pure of intentions. Why wouldn't he be now?
> >>
> >> Preston
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> back."
> > ~Dakota Jack~
> >
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Preston Crawford <me...@prestoncrawford.com>.
was using it for effect. I was trying to be over the top.
Apparently both of you missed the sarcasm.
Preston
Also educated in a blue state, whatever that means.
> You said "nefarious". That is a strawman. I said I don't disparage
> Craig,
> and I don't. Let me make it clear that so far as I know Craig is a decent
> and honorable man. This is about principle, not about personalities. I
> cannot stand the President's policies and priorities as I don't like
> Craig's, but I think the President is a good and honorable man.
>
> Let me say do say in your favor, Sean, that you certainly used to show
> huge
> restraint of pen and tongue, since you did not comment on the Struts lists
> for three years after your recently disclosed active involvement.
>
> On 12/16/05, Preston Crawford <me...@prestoncrawford.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I have never had a concern about the "umbrella" idea, which is the
>> latest
>> > description of what is happening. I would in fact encourage that and
>> > cannot
>> > see any problem with it. However, I pay more attention to people's
>> feet
>> > than their lips. "Is Shale the Next Struts?" is the feet. The
>> community
>> > is
>> > not served by the whole panoply of things similar to that which have
>> been
>> > fast and furious over the year plus. If there were a consistent
>> message
>> > and
>> > this change of tune when addressing the "outer world" was not the
>> norm,
>> > then
>> > I would have no qualms. However, with the data and the facts the way
>> they
>> > are, I think it is naive to expect that Craig really is interested in
>> > community. I do not disparage Craig in saying that. He doesn't have
>> to
>> > be
>> > interested in anything. I just don't feel like being an unwitting
>> toady.
>>
>> ?????
>>
>> Craig is so nefarious...... Good thing you're not unwitting... that
>> you're
>> on your guard.
>>
>> Craig has been helping people on the Struts list for years. I first
>> adopted and learned Struts when it was beta. Pre version 1.0. And he was
>> helpful then and pure of intentions. Why wouldn't he be now?
>>
>> Preston
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
> ~Dakota Jack~
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
You said "nefarious". That is a strawman. I said I don't disparage Craig,
and I don't. Let me make it clear that so far as I know Craig is a decent
and honorable man. This is about principle, not about personalities. I
cannot stand the President's policies and priorities as I don't like
Craig's, but I think the President is a good and honorable man.
Let me say do say in your favor, Sean, that you certainly used to show huge
restraint of pen and tongue, since you did not comment on the Struts lists
for three years after your recently disclosed active involvement.
On 12/16/05, Preston Crawford <me...@prestoncrawford.com> wrote:
>
> > I have never had a concern about the "umbrella" idea, which is the
> latest
> > description of what is happening. I would in fact encourage that and
> > cannot
> > see any problem with it. However, I pay more attention to people's feet
> > than their lips. "Is Shale the Next Struts?" is the feet. The
> community
> > is
> > not served by the whole panoply of things similar to that which have
> been
> > fast and furious over the year plus. If there were a consistent message
> > and
> > this change of tune when addressing the "outer world" was not the norm,
> > then
> > I would have no qualms. However, with the data and the facts the way
> they
> > are, I think it is naive to expect that Craig really is interested in
> > community. I do not disparage Craig in saying that. He doesn't have to
> > be
> > interested in anything. I just don't feel like being an unwitting
> toady.
>
> ?????
>
> Craig is so nefarious...... Good thing you're not unwitting... that you're
> on your guard.
>
> Craig has been helping people on the Struts list for years. I first
> adopted and learned Struts when it was beta. Pre version 1.0. And he was
> helpful then and pure of intentions. Why wouldn't he be now?
>
> Preston
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Preston Crawford <me...@prestoncrawford.com>.
> I have never had a concern about the "umbrella" idea, which is the latest
> description of what is happening. I would in fact encourage that and
> cannot
> see any problem with it. However, I pay more attention to people's feet
> than their lips. "Is Shale the Next Struts?" is the feet. The community
> is
> not served by the whole panoply of things similar to that which have been
> fast and furious over the year plus. If there were a consistent message
> and
> this change of tune when addressing the "outer world" was not the norm,
> then
> I would have no qualms. However, with the data and the facts the way they
> are, I think it is naive to expect that Craig really is interested in
> community. I do not disparage Craig in saying that. He doesn't have to
> be
> interested in anything. I just don't feel like being an unwitting toady.
?????
Craig is so nefarious...... Good thing you're not unwitting... that you're
on your guard.
Craig has been helping people on the Struts list for years. I first
adopted and learned Struts when it was beta. Pre version 1.0. And he was
helpful then and pure of intentions. Why wouldn't he be now?
Preston
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
On Fri, December 16, 2005 12:10 pm, Patrick Lightbody said:
> Craig committed to changing his slides moving forward and attributed
> it to an honest mistake and a case of "laziness" :)
There was a time where I would have doubted that, but that is what I was
referring to before when I said I regretted certain things I have said in
the past. My opinion has since changed on the subject.
> I have no reason
> to doubt that he will be changing this in the coming days and weeks.
Nor do I, and I have no problem whatsoever believing it is exactly as he
says.
Thank for passing this info along Patrick :)
Frank
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
On Fri, December 16, 2005 12:10 pm, Patrick Lightbody said:
> Craig committed to changing his slides moving forward and attributed
> it to an honest mistake and a case of "laziness" :)
There was a time where I would have doubted that, but that is what I was
referring to before when I said I regretted certain things I have said in
the past. My opinion has since changed on the subject.
> I have no reason
> to doubt that he will be changing this in the coming days and weeks.
Nor do I, and I have no problem whatsoever believing it is exactly as he
says.
Thank for passing this info along Patrick :)
Frank
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Patrick Lightbody <pl...@gmail.com>.
Craig committed to changing his slides moving forward and attributed
it to an honest mistake and a case of "laziness" :) I have no reason
to doubt that he will be changing this in the coming days and weeks.
Patrick
On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have never had a concern about the "umbrella" idea, which is the latest
> description of what is happening. I would in fact encourage that and cannot
> see any problem with it. However, I pay more attention to people's feet
> than their lips. "Is Shale the Next Struts?" is the feet. The community is
> not served by the whole panoply of things similar to that which have been
> fast and furious over the year plus. If there were a consistent message and
> this change of tune when addressing the "outer world" was not the norm, then
> I would have no qualms. However, with the data and the facts the way they
> are, I think it is naive to expect that Craig really is interested in
> community. I do not disparage Craig in saying that. He doesn't have to be
> interested in anything. I just don't feel like being an unwitting toady.
>
> On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fz...@omnytex.com> wrote:
> >
> > And I too have made some disparaging comments about certain things
> > (Shale/JSF/Craig) in the past (although I regret much of it, especially
> > the things with regard to Craig directly, so I'm not about to do the
> > Googling for you!)... However, I have come to see the "Struts Umbrella"
> > approach as being not necessarily bad or contradictory.
> >
> > That being said, I also don't see Dakotas' point as being completely
> > unreasonable. Is Struts an umbrella for two different paths, Shale and
> > Action Framework, or is Shale really potentially the next Struts? I do
> > think there is a contradiction there. Dakota may see a conspiracy, I
> > think its more likely just some unfortunate choices or maybe just
> > unfortunate timing. But either way, I *do* think it is confusing for
> > people.
> >
> > I do have to say that I thought the situtation was worse a few weeks ago,
> > and to their credit I think the Struts committers have done a good job of
> > disambiguating what the struture is. Kudos for that. Now as long as
> > things stick to that structure, after the initial shock people may
> > experience over learning "Struts" isn't quite what it was before, I think
> > things will go pretty smoothly.
> >
> > --
> > Frank W. Zammetti
> > Founder and Chief Software Architect
> > Omnytex Technologies
> > http://www.omnytex.com
> > AIM: fzammetti
> > Yahoo: fzammetti
> > MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
> >
> > On Fri, December 16, 2005 11:07 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
> > > I think I can offer a somewhat unique perspective. As an "outsider" to
> > > Struts and someone who has spent 3 years living in the "WebWork
> > > world", I only recently many of the Struts developers and community
> > > this week at ApacheCon. Having been in a room talking about this very
> > > issue with Ted, Don, Craig, Martin, Neil, Clinton, and others, I can
> > > say without a doubt that everyone is on board with this vision of
> > > Struts as a community and two parallel frameworks.
> > >
> > > More so, we are all in agreement that we will collaborate wherever
> > > possible, including:
> > >
> > > - common set of Java 5 annotations
> > > - similar style configuration tricks (auto-reloading, consistent use
> > > of DTD or XML schema, etc)
> > > - validation engine
> > > - internationalization
> > > - possibly some tags even
> > >
> > > I'd also like to add that whatever the history has been, today I see
> > > Struts as a unique offering. In the web development space (regardless
> > > of language), there are two schools of thoughts:
> > >
> > > - action frameworks: bind requests to methods in beans
> > > - event/component frameworks: don't worry about URLs as much and bind
> > to
> > > events
> > >
> > > I think it is fair to say that marketplace of developers has not yet
> > > decided that one of these is a clear "winner". Struts, as a community,
> > > is uniquely positioned to offer both options and is best prepared for
> > > the day when that winner is declared. We all agreed that when that day
> > > comes, by working together in other areas (validation, i18n, config,
> > > annotations, etc) not only will the code be easy to merge, but the
> > > community will be too. No other web development community offers this.
> > >
> > > As someone who has said some pretty disparaging remarks about Struts
> > > technolog and community in the part (I'll do the google search for
> > > you:
> > >
> > http://blogs.opensymphony.com/plightbo/2003/10/webwork_docaday_struts_really.html)
> > ,
> > > I can comfortably say I made a big mistake in choosing to create a
> > > divide but that I've learned from that mistake and that is why I am
> > > here today.
> > >
> > > And I believe that everyone in the Struts community is also on board
> > > to continue the grow the spirit of cooperation, not only between
> > > Struts Action and WebWork, but between Struts Action and Struts Shale.
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > > On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fz...@omnytex.com> wrote:
> > >> I think it is fair to say that many of us have made similar comments
> > >> over
> > >> the past few months, and have every time been basically told that it is
> > >> our problem we are not "getting it". Usually we've been told nicely,
> > >> but
> > >> not always. That isn't the point though, The point is that this is
> > not
> > >> a
> > >> new complaint by any stretch, and it has previously been dismissed on
> > >> many
> > >> occasions by more than one person.
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Frank W. Zammetti
> > >> Founder and Chief Software Architect
> > >> Omnytex Technologies
> > >> http://www.omnytex.com
> > >> AIM: fzammetti
> > >> Yahoo: fzammetti
> > >> MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, December 16, 2005 10:37 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
> > >> > This sounds familiar :)
> > >> >
> > >> > I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
> > >> > presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
> > >> >
> > >> > Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
> > >> > Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and
> > clear
> > >> > on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
> > >> > frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
> > >> >
> > >> > Patrick
> > >> >
> > >> > On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at
> > >> significant
> > >> >> conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next
> > >> >> Struts",
> > >> >> you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
> > >> >> baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have
> > >> read
> > >> >> all
> > >> >> about the Trojan Horse.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a
> > >> subproject
> > >> >> > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > -- Paul
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Craig
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> --
> > >> >> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> > >> >> back."
> > >> >> ~Dakota Jack~
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
> ~Dakota Jack~
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
I have never had a concern about the "umbrella" idea, which is the latest
description of what is happening. I would in fact encourage that and cannot
see any problem with it. However, I pay more attention to people's feet
than their lips. "Is Shale the Next Struts?" is the feet. The community is
not served by the whole panoply of things similar to that which have been
fast and furious over the year plus. If there were a consistent message and
this change of tune when addressing the "outer world" was not the norm, then
I would have no qualms. However, with the data and the facts the way they
are, I think it is naive to expect that Craig really is interested in
community. I do not disparage Craig in saying that. He doesn't have to be
interested in anything. I just don't feel like being an unwitting toady.
On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fz...@omnytex.com> wrote:
>
> And I too have made some disparaging comments about certain things
> (Shale/JSF/Craig) in the past (although I regret much of it, especially
> the things with regard to Craig directly, so I'm not about to do the
> Googling for you!)... However, I have come to see the "Struts Umbrella"
> approach as being not necessarily bad or contradictory.
>
> That being said, I also don't see Dakotas' point as being completely
> unreasonable. Is Struts an umbrella for two different paths, Shale and
> Action Framework, or is Shale really potentially the next Struts? I do
> think there is a contradiction there. Dakota may see a conspiracy, I
> think its more likely just some unfortunate choices or maybe just
> unfortunate timing. But either way, I *do* think it is confusing for
> people.
>
> I do have to say that I thought the situtation was worse a few weeks ago,
> and to their credit I think the Struts committers have done a good job of
> disambiguating what the struture is. Kudos for that. Now as long as
> things stick to that structure, after the initial shock people may
> experience over learning "Struts" isn't quite what it was before, I think
> things will go pretty smoothly.
>
> --
> Frank W. Zammetti
> Founder and Chief Software Architect
> Omnytex Technologies
> http://www.omnytex.com
> AIM: fzammetti
> Yahoo: fzammetti
> MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
>
> On Fri, December 16, 2005 11:07 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
> > I think I can offer a somewhat unique perspective. As an "outsider" to
> > Struts and someone who has spent 3 years living in the "WebWork
> > world", I only recently many of the Struts developers and community
> > this week at ApacheCon. Having been in a room talking about this very
> > issue with Ted, Don, Craig, Martin, Neil, Clinton, and others, I can
> > say without a doubt that everyone is on board with this vision of
> > Struts as a community and two parallel frameworks.
> >
> > More so, we are all in agreement that we will collaborate wherever
> > possible, including:
> >
> > - common set of Java 5 annotations
> > - similar style configuration tricks (auto-reloading, consistent use
> > of DTD or XML schema, etc)
> > - validation engine
> > - internationalization
> > - possibly some tags even
> >
> > I'd also like to add that whatever the history has been, today I see
> > Struts as a unique offering. In the web development space (regardless
> > of language), there are two schools of thoughts:
> >
> > - action frameworks: bind requests to methods in beans
> > - event/component frameworks: don't worry about URLs as much and bind
> to
> > events
> >
> > I think it is fair to say that marketplace of developers has not yet
> > decided that one of these is a clear "winner". Struts, as a community,
> > is uniquely positioned to offer both options and is best prepared for
> > the day when that winner is declared. We all agreed that when that day
> > comes, by working together in other areas (validation, i18n, config,
> > annotations, etc) not only will the code be easy to merge, but the
> > community will be too. No other web development community offers this.
> >
> > As someone who has said some pretty disparaging remarks about Struts
> > technolog and community in the part (I'll do the google search for
> > you:
> >
> http://blogs.opensymphony.com/plightbo/2003/10/webwork_docaday_struts_really.html)
> ,
> > I can comfortably say I made a big mistake in choosing to create a
> > divide but that I've learned from that mistake and that is why I am
> > here today.
> >
> > And I believe that everyone in the Struts community is also on board
> > to continue the grow the spirit of cooperation, not only between
> > Struts Action and WebWork, but between Struts Action and Struts Shale.
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> > On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fz...@omnytex.com> wrote:
> >> I think it is fair to say that many of us have made similar comments
> >> over
> >> the past few months, and have every time been basically told that it is
> >> our problem we are not "getting it". Usually we've been told nicely,
> >> but
> >> not always. That isn't the point though, The point is that this is
> not
> >> a
> >> new complaint by any stretch, and it has previously been dismissed on
> >> many
> >> occasions by more than one person.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Frank W. Zammetti
> >> Founder and Chief Software Architect
> >> Omnytex Technologies
> >> http://www.omnytex.com
> >> AIM: fzammetti
> >> Yahoo: fzammetti
> >> MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
> >>
> >> On Fri, December 16, 2005 10:37 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
> >> > This sounds familiar :)
> >> >
> >> > I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
> >> > presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
> >> >
> >> >
> http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
> >> >
> >> > Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
> >> > Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and
> clear
> >> > on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
> >> > frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
> >> >
> >> > Patrick
> >> >
> >> > On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at
> >> significant
> >> >> conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next
> >> >> Struts",
> >> >> you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
> >> >> baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have
> >> read
> >> >> all
> >> >> about the Trojan Horse.
> >> >>
> >> >> On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a
> >> subproject
> >> >> > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
> >> >> >
> >> >> > -- Paul
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Craig
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> >> >> back."
> >> >> ~Dakota Jack~
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
I understand what your saying, and even agree, but on the point of
marketing... granted, none of us, whether committer or not, is here to do
marketing, but isn't there a certain degree of responsibility
(potentially) to not confuse the market when there is precedent?
I mean, if I wanted to change the name of Java Web Parts tomorrow, it
isn't like a huge chunk of the world is using it and would be confused by
that (I'm happy to say its a growing chunk though!). Struts, being the de
facto Java development framework at this point, and for some time now, I
think forces a certain degree of responsibility on those stewarding it to
be a little more careful. Is that not a reasonable position to take?
I want to say again that I think you and the rest of the committers have
done a good job over the past few weeks of removing a lot of the confusion
that I and others saw a while ago. I think Shale's position has been
clarified as well, so this is more of a philosophical discussion at this
point, Darwin would appear to have done his thing already in the real
world :)
Frank
On Fri, December 16, 2005 12:43 pm, Ted Husted said:
> On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fz...@omnytex.com> wrote:
>> unreasonable. Is Struts an umbrella for two different paths, Shale and
>> Action Framework, or is Shale really potentially the next Struts? I do
>> think there is a contradiction there.
>
> One of the core Apache beliefs is that "Darwin decides". An ASF
> project does not have an "alpha geek" that makes all the decisions. We
> come to decisions collaboratively over time.
>
> One of the reasons we like to give new proposals and codebases names
> is because we don't want to decide until we see the code and try it
> for ourselves. It's very possible, even probable, that Ti will be the
> next Action, but, until we see more of the code, and migrate some of
> our own applications, we're reluncant to drop the codename.
>
> If we were subject to a marketing department, we might do things
> differently. But, we are all just engineers here, making decisions
> based on engineering principles alone. I know that some people think
> we should make decisions based on marketing principles. But I don't
> believe the committers came here for the marketing. We came here to
> collaborate on the engineering.
>
> We aren't Sun and we aren't Microsoft, or even Linus. We aren't going
> to tell you what product you should be using in your own application.
> That's your decision. We like to share our own engineering decisions
> with the group, but, only because we are always looking for new people
> to collaborate with us on the engineering.
>
>>>From an engineering perspective, being able to work on both Shale/JSF
> and Action/JSP is an exciting idea. The frameworks are different in
> many ways, but alike in many others. Moving forward, I think we can
> find many places where the frameworks can share more code and more
> ideas. As always, we are still inventing the future.
>
>
> -Ted.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Ted Husted <te...@gmail.com>.
On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fz...@omnytex.com> wrote:
> unreasonable. Is Struts an umbrella for two different paths, Shale and
> Action Framework, or is Shale really potentially the next Struts? I do
> think there is a contradiction there.
One of the core Apache beliefs is that "Darwin decides". An ASF
project does not have an "alpha geek" that makes all the decisions. We
come to decisions collaboratively over time.
One of the reasons we like to give new proposals and codebases names
is because we don't want to decide until we see the code and try it
for ourselves. It's very possible, even probable, that Ti will be the
next Action, but, until we see more of the code, and migrate some of
our own applications, we're reluncant to drop the codename.
If we were subject to a marketing department, we might do things
differently. But, we are all just engineers here, making decisions
based on engineering principles alone. I know that some people think
we should make decisions based on marketing principles. But I don't
believe the committers came here for the marketing. We came here to
collaborate on the engineering.
We aren't Sun and we aren't Microsoft, or even Linus. We aren't going
to tell you what product you should be using in your own application.
That's your decision. We like to share our own engineering decisions
with the group, but, only because we are always looking for new people
to collaborate with us on the engineering.
>From an engineering perspective, being able to work on both Shale/JSF
and Action/JSP is an exciting idea. The frameworks are different in
many ways, but alike in many others. Moving forward, I think we can
find many places where the frameworks can share more code and more
ideas. As always, we are still inventing the future.
-Ted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
I have never had a concern about the "umbrella" idea, which is the latest
description of what is happening. I would in fact encourage that and cannot
see any problem with it. However, I pay more attention to people's feet
than their lips. "Is Shale the Next Struts?" is the feet. The community is
not served by the whole panoply of things similar to that which have been
fast and furious over the year plus. If there were a consistent message and
this change of tune when addressing the "outer world" was not the norm, then
I would have no qualms. However, with the data and the facts the way they
are, I think it is naive to expect that Craig really is interested in
community. I do not disparage Craig in saying that. He doesn't have to be
interested in anything. I just don't feel like being an unwitting toady.
On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fz...@omnytex.com> wrote:
>
> And I too have made some disparaging comments about certain things
> (Shale/JSF/Craig) in the past (although I regret much of it, especially
> the things with regard to Craig directly, so I'm not about to do the
> Googling for you!)... However, I have come to see the "Struts Umbrella"
> approach as being not necessarily bad or contradictory.
>
> That being said, I also don't see Dakotas' point as being completely
> unreasonable. Is Struts an umbrella for two different paths, Shale and
> Action Framework, or is Shale really potentially the next Struts? I do
> think there is a contradiction there. Dakota may see a conspiracy, I
> think its more likely just some unfortunate choices or maybe just
> unfortunate timing. But either way, I *do* think it is confusing for
> people.
>
> I do have to say that I thought the situtation was worse a few weeks ago,
> and to their credit I think the Struts committers have done a good job of
> disambiguating what the struture is. Kudos for that. Now as long as
> things stick to that structure, after the initial shock people may
> experience over learning "Struts" isn't quite what it was before, I think
> things will go pretty smoothly.
>
> --
> Frank W. Zammetti
> Founder and Chief Software Architect
> Omnytex Technologies
> http://www.omnytex.com
> AIM: fzammetti
> Yahoo: fzammetti
> MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
>
> On Fri, December 16, 2005 11:07 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
> > I think I can offer a somewhat unique perspective. As an "outsider" to
> > Struts and someone who has spent 3 years living in the "WebWork
> > world", I only recently many of the Struts developers and community
> > this week at ApacheCon. Having been in a room talking about this very
> > issue with Ted, Don, Craig, Martin, Neil, Clinton, and others, I can
> > say without a doubt that everyone is on board with this vision of
> > Struts as a community and two parallel frameworks.
> >
> > More so, we are all in agreement that we will collaborate wherever
> > possible, including:
> >
> > - common set of Java 5 annotations
> > - similar style configuration tricks (auto-reloading, consistent use
> > of DTD or XML schema, etc)
> > - validation engine
> > - internationalization
> > - possibly some tags even
> >
> > I'd also like to add that whatever the history has been, today I see
> > Struts as a unique offering. In the web development space (regardless
> > of language), there are two schools of thoughts:
> >
> > - action frameworks: bind requests to methods in beans
> > - event/component frameworks: don't worry about URLs as much and bind
> to
> > events
> >
> > I think it is fair to say that marketplace of developers has not yet
> > decided that one of these is a clear "winner". Struts, as a community,
> > is uniquely positioned to offer both options and is best prepared for
> > the day when that winner is declared. We all agreed that when that day
> > comes, by working together in other areas (validation, i18n, config,
> > annotations, etc) not only will the code be easy to merge, but the
> > community will be too. No other web development community offers this.
> >
> > As someone who has said some pretty disparaging remarks about Struts
> > technolog and community in the part (I'll do the google search for
> > you:
> >
> http://blogs.opensymphony.com/plightbo/2003/10/webwork_docaday_struts_really.html)
> ,
> > I can comfortably say I made a big mistake in choosing to create a
> > divide but that I've learned from that mistake and that is why I am
> > here today.
> >
> > And I believe that everyone in the Struts community is also on board
> > to continue the grow the spirit of cooperation, not only between
> > Struts Action and WebWork, but between Struts Action and Struts Shale.
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> > On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fz...@omnytex.com> wrote:
> >> I think it is fair to say that many of us have made similar comments
> >> over
> >> the past few months, and have every time been basically told that it is
> >> our problem we are not "getting it". Usually we've been told nicely,
> >> but
> >> not always. That isn't the point though, The point is that this is
> not
> >> a
> >> new complaint by any stretch, and it has previously been dismissed on
> >> many
> >> occasions by more than one person.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Frank W. Zammetti
> >> Founder and Chief Software Architect
> >> Omnytex Technologies
> >> http://www.omnytex.com
> >> AIM: fzammetti
> >> Yahoo: fzammetti
> >> MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
> >>
> >> On Fri, December 16, 2005 10:37 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
> >> > This sounds familiar :)
> >> >
> >> > I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
> >> > presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
> >> >
> >> >
> http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
> >> >
> >> > Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
> >> > Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and
> clear
> >> > on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
> >> > frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
> >> >
> >> > Patrick
> >> >
> >> > On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at
> >> significant
> >> >> conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next
> >> >> Struts",
> >> >> you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
> >> >> baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have
> >> read
> >> >> all
> >> >> about the Trojan Horse.
> >> >>
> >> >> On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a
> >> subproject
> >> >> > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
> >> >> >
> >> >> > -- Paul
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Craig
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> >> >> back."
> >> >> ~Dakota Jack~
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
And I too have made some disparaging comments about certain things
(Shale/JSF/Craig) in the past (although I regret much of it, especially
the things with regard to Craig directly, so I'm not about to do the
Googling for you!)... However, I have come to see the "Struts Umbrella"
approach as being not necessarily bad or contradictory.
That being said, I also don't see Dakotas' point as being completely
unreasonable. Is Struts an umbrella for two different paths, Shale and
Action Framework, or is Shale really potentially the next Struts? I do
think there is a contradiction there. Dakota may see a conspiracy, I
think its more likely just some unfortunate choices or maybe just
unfortunate timing. But either way, I *do* think it is confusing for
people.
I do have to say that I thought the situtation was worse a few weeks ago,
and to their credit I think the Struts committers have done a good job of
disambiguating what the struture is. Kudos for that. Now as long as
things stick to that structure, after the initial shock people may
experience over learning "Struts" isn't quite what it was before, I think
things will go pretty smoothly.
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
AIM: fzammetti
Yahoo: fzammetti
MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
On Fri, December 16, 2005 11:07 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
> I think I can offer a somewhat unique perspective. As an "outsider" to
> Struts and someone who has spent 3 years living in the "WebWork
> world", I only recently many of the Struts developers and community
> this week at ApacheCon. Having been in a room talking about this very
> issue with Ted, Don, Craig, Martin, Neil, Clinton, and others, I can
> say without a doubt that everyone is on board with this vision of
> Struts as a community and two parallel frameworks.
>
> More so, we are all in agreement that we will collaborate wherever
> possible, including:
>
> - common set of Java 5 annotations
> - similar style configuration tricks (auto-reloading, consistent use
> of DTD or XML schema, etc)
> - validation engine
> - internationalization
> - possibly some tags even
>
> I'd also like to add that whatever the history has been, today I see
> Struts as a unique offering. In the web development space (regardless
> of language), there are two schools of thoughts:
>
> - action frameworks: bind requests to methods in beans
> - event/component frameworks: don't worry about URLs as much and bind to
> events
>
> I think it is fair to say that marketplace of developers has not yet
> decided that one of these is a clear "winner". Struts, as a community,
> is uniquely positioned to offer both options and is best prepared for
> the day when that winner is declared. We all agreed that when that day
> comes, by working together in other areas (validation, i18n, config,
> annotations, etc) not only will the code be easy to merge, but the
> community will be too. No other web development community offers this.
>
> As someone who has said some pretty disparaging remarks about Struts
> technolog and community in the part (I'll do the google search for
> you:
> http://blogs.opensymphony.com/plightbo/2003/10/webwork_docaday_struts_really.html),
> I can comfortably say I made a big mistake in choosing to create a
> divide but that I've learned from that mistake and that is why I am
> here today.
>
> And I believe that everyone in the Struts community is also on board
> to continue the grow the spirit of cooperation, not only between
> Struts Action and WebWork, but between Struts Action and Struts Shale.
>
> Patrick
>
> On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fz...@omnytex.com> wrote:
>> I think it is fair to say that many of us have made similar comments
>> over
>> the past few months, and have every time been basically told that it is
>> our problem we are not "getting it". Usually we've been told nicely,
>> but
>> not always. That isn't the point though, The point is that this is not
>> a
>> new complaint by any stretch, and it has previously been dismissed on
>> many
>> occasions by more than one person.
>>
>> --
>> Frank W. Zammetti
>> Founder and Chief Software Architect
>> Omnytex Technologies
>> http://www.omnytex.com
>> AIM: fzammetti
>> Yahoo: fzammetti
>> MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
>>
>> On Fri, December 16, 2005 10:37 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
>> > This sounds familiar :)
>> >
>> > I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
>> > presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
>> >
>> > http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
>> >
>> > Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
>> > Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and clear
>> > on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
>> > frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
>> >
>> > Patrick
>> >
>> > On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at
>> significant
>> >> conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next
>> >> Struts",
>> >> you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
>> >> baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have
>> read
>> >> all
>> >> about the Trojan Horse.
>> >>
>> >> On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a
>> subproject
>> >> > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
>> >> >
>> >> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
>> >> >
>> >> > -- Paul
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Craig
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
>> >> back."
>> >> ~Dakota Jack~
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
I have no reservations about your sincerity, Patrick, and I am glad to find
you at Struts. Welcome! However, I would be careful if I were you about
being sanguine about your new companions. I hope things turn out as you
have indicated.
On 12/16/05, Patrick Lightbody <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think I can offer a somewhat unique perspective. As an "outsider" to
> Struts and someone who has spent 3 years living in the "WebWork
> world", I only recently many of the Struts developers and community
> this week at ApacheCon. Having been in a room talking about this very
> issue with Ted, Don, Craig, Martin, Neil, Clinton, and others, I can
> say without a doubt that everyone is on board with this vision of
> Struts as a community and two parallel frameworks.
>
> More so, we are all in agreement that we will collaborate wherever
> possible, including:
>
> - common set of Java 5 annotations
> - similar style configuration tricks (auto-reloading, consistent use
> of DTD or XML schema, etc)
> - validation engine
> - internationalization
> - possibly some tags even
>
> I'd also like to add that whatever the history has been, today I see
> Struts as a unique offering. In the web development space (regardless
> of language), there are two schools of thoughts:
>
> - action frameworks: bind requests to methods in beans
> - event/component frameworks: don't worry about URLs as much and bind to
> events
>
> I think it is fair to say that marketplace of developers has not yet
> decided that one of these is a clear "winner". Struts, as a community,
> is uniquely positioned to offer both options and is best prepared for
> the day when that winner is declared. We all agreed that when that day
> comes, by working together in other areas (validation, i18n, config,
> annotations, etc) not only will the code be easy to merge, but the
> community will be too. No other web development community offers this.
>
> As someone who has said some pretty disparaging remarks about Struts
> technolog and community in the part (I'll do the google search for
> you:
> http://blogs.opensymphony.com/plightbo/2003/10/webwork_docaday_struts_really.html)
> ,
> I can comfortably say I made a big mistake in choosing to create a
> divide but that I've learned from that mistake and that is why I am
> here today.
>
> And I believe that everyone in the Struts community is also on board
> to continue the grow the spirit of cooperation, not only between
> Struts Action and WebWork, but between Struts Action and Struts Shale.
>
> Patrick
>
> On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fz...@omnytex.com> wrote:
> > I think it is fair to say that many of us have made similar comments
> over
> > the past few months, and have every time been basically told that it is
> > our problem we are not "getting it". Usually we've been told nicely,
> but
> > not always. That isn't the point though, The point is that this is not
> a
> > new complaint by any stretch, and it has previously been dismissed on
> many
> > occasions by more than one person.
> >
> > --
> > Frank W. Zammetti
> > Founder and Chief Software Architect
> > Omnytex Technologies
> > http://www.omnytex.com
> > AIM: fzammetti
> > Yahoo: fzammetti
> > MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
> >
> > On Fri, December 16, 2005 10:37 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
> > > This sounds familiar :)
> > >
> > > I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
> > > presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
> > >
> > >
> http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
> > >
> > > Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
> > > Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and clear
> > > on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
> > > frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > > On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at
> significant
> > >> conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next
> > >> Struts",
> > >> you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
> > >> baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have
> read
> > >> all
> > >> about the Trojan Horse.
> > >>
> > >> On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a
> subproject
> > >> > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
> > >> >
> > >> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
> > >> >
> > >> > -- Paul
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Craig
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> > >> back."
> > >> ~Dakota Jack~
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
I have no reservations about your sincerity, Patrick, and I am glad to find
you at Struts. Welcome! However, I would be careful if I were you about
being sanguine about your new companions. I hope things turn out as you
have indicated.
On 12/16/05, Patrick Lightbody <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think I can offer a somewhat unique perspective. As an "outsider" to
> Struts and someone who has spent 3 years living in the "WebWork
> world", I only recently many of the Struts developers and community
> this week at ApacheCon. Having been in a room talking about this very
> issue with Ted, Don, Craig, Martin, Neil, Clinton, and others, I can
> say without a doubt that everyone is on board with this vision of
> Struts as a community and two parallel frameworks.
>
> More so, we are all in agreement that we will collaborate wherever
> possible, including:
>
> - common set of Java 5 annotations
> - similar style configuration tricks (auto-reloading, consistent use
> of DTD or XML schema, etc)
> - validation engine
> - internationalization
> - possibly some tags even
>
> I'd also like to add that whatever the history has been, today I see
> Struts as a unique offering. In the web development space (regardless
> of language), there are two schools of thoughts:
>
> - action frameworks: bind requests to methods in beans
> - event/component frameworks: don't worry about URLs as much and bind to
> events
>
> I think it is fair to say that marketplace of developers has not yet
> decided that one of these is a clear "winner". Struts, as a community,
> is uniquely positioned to offer both options and is best prepared for
> the day when that winner is declared. We all agreed that when that day
> comes, by working together in other areas (validation, i18n, config,
> annotations, etc) not only will the code be easy to merge, but the
> community will be too. No other web development community offers this.
>
> As someone who has said some pretty disparaging remarks about Struts
> technolog and community in the part (I'll do the google search for
> you:
> http://blogs.opensymphony.com/plightbo/2003/10/webwork_docaday_struts_really.html)
> ,
> I can comfortably say I made a big mistake in choosing to create a
> divide but that I've learned from that mistake and that is why I am
> here today.
>
> And I believe that everyone in the Struts community is also on board
> to continue the grow the spirit of cooperation, not only between
> Struts Action and WebWork, but between Struts Action and Struts Shale.
>
> Patrick
>
> On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fz...@omnytex.com> wrote:
> > I think it is fair to say that many of us have made similar comments
> over
> > the past few months, and have every time been basically told that it is
> > our problem we are not "getting it". Usually we've been told nicely,
> but
> > not always. That isn't the point though, The point is that this is not
> a
> > new complaint by any stretch, and it has previously been dismissed on
> many
> > occasions by more than one person.
> >
> > --
> > Frank W. Zammetti
> > Founder and Chief Software Architect
> > Omnytex Technologies
> > http://www.omnytex.com
> > AIM: fzammetti
> > Yahoo: fzammetti
> > MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
> >
> > On Fri, December 16, 2005 10:37 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
> > > This sounds familiar :)
> > >
> > > I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
> > > presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
> > >
> > >
> http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
> > >
> > > Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
> > > Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and clear
> > > on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
> > > frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > > On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at
> significant
> > >> conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next
> > >> Struts",
> > >> you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
> > >> baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have
> read
> > >> all
> > >> about the Trojan Horse.
> > >>
> > >> On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a
> subproject
> > >> > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
> > >> >
> > >> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
> > >> >
> > >> > -- Paul
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Craig
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> > >> back."
> > >> ~Dakota Jack~
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
And I too have made some disparaging comments about certain things
(Shale/JSF/Craig) in the past (although I regret much of it, especially
the things with regard to Craig directly, so I'm not about to do the
Googling for you!)... However, I have come to see the "Struts Umbrella"
approach as being not necessarily bad or contradictory.
That being said, I also don't see Dakotas' point as being completely
unreasonable. Is Struts an umbrella for two different paths, Shale and
Action Framework, or is Shale really potentially the next Struts? I do
think there is a contradiction there. Dakota may see a conspiracy, I
think its more likely just some unfortunate choices or maybe just
unfortunate timing. But either way, I *do* think it is confusing for
people.
I do have to say that I thought the situtation was worse a few weeks ago,
and to their credit I think the Struts committers have done a good job of
disambiguating what the struture is. Kudos for that. Now as long as
things stick to that structure, after the initial shock people may
experience over learning "Struts" isn't quite what it was before, I think
things will go pretty smoothly.
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
AIM: fzammetti
Yahoo: fzammetti
MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
On Fri, December 16, 2005 11:07 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
> I think I can offer a somewhat unique perspective. As an "outsider" to
> Struts and someone who has spent 3 years living in the "WebWork
> world", I only recently many of the Struts developers and community
> this week at ApacheCon. Having been in a room talking about this very
> issue with Ted, Don, Craig, Martin, Neil, Clinton, and others, I can
> say without a doubt that everyone is on board with this vision of
> Struts as a community and two parallel frameworks.
>
> More so, we are all in agreement that we will collaborate wherever
> possible, including:
>
> - common set of Java 5 annotations
> - similar style configuration tricks (auto-reloading, consistent use
> of DTD or XML schema, etc)
> - validation engine
> - internationalization
> - possibly some tags even
>
> I'd also like to add that whatever the history has been, today I see
> Struts as a unique offering. In the web development space (regardless
> of language), there are two schools of thoughts:
>
> - action frameworks: bind requests to methods in beans
> - event/component frameworks: don't worry about URLs as much and bind to
> events
>
> I think it is fair to say that marketplace of developers has not yet
> decided that one of these is a clear "winner". Struts, as a community,
> is uniquely positioned to offer both options and is best prepared for
> the day when that winner is declared. We all agreed that when that day
> comes, by working together in other areas (validation, i18n, config,
> annotations, etc) not only will the code be easy to merge, but the
> community will be too. No other web development community offers this.
>
> As someone who has said some pretty disparaging remarks about Struts
> technolog and community in the part (I'll do the google search for
> you:
> http://blogs.opensymphony.com/plightbo/2003/10/webwork_docaday_struts_really.html),
> I can comfortably say I made a big mistake in choosing to create a
> divide but that I've learned from that mistake and that is why I am
> here today.
>
> And I believe that everyone in the Struts community is also on board
> to continue the grow the spirit of cooperation, not only between
> Struts Action and WebWork, but between Struts Action and Struts Shale.
>
> Patrick
>
> On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fz...@omnytex.com> wrote:
>> I think it is fair to say that many of us have made similar comments
>> over
>> the past few months, and have every time been basically told that it is
>> our problem we are not "getting it". Usually we've been told nicely,
>> but
>> not always. That isn't the point though, The point is that this is not
>> a
>> new complaint by any stretch, and it has previously been dismissed on
>> many
>> occasions by more than one person.
>>
>> --
>> Frank W. Zammetti
>> Founder and Chief Software Architect
>> Omnytex Technologies
>> http://www.omnytex.com
>> AIM: fzammetti
>> Yahoo: fzammetti
>> MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
>>
>> On Fri, December 16, 2005 10:37 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
>> > This sounds familiar :)
>> >
>> > I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
>> > presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
>> >
>> > http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
>> >
>> > Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
>> > Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and clear
>> > on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
>> > frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
>> >
>> > Patrick
>> >
>> > On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at
>> significant
>> >> conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next
>> >> Struts",
>> >> you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
>> >> baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have
>> read
>> >> all
>> >> about the Trojan Horse.
>> >>
>> >> On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a
>> subproject
>> >> > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
>> >> >
>> >> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
>> >> >
>> >> > -- Paul
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Craig
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
>> >> back."
>> >> ~Dakota Jack~
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Patrick Lightbody <pl...@gmail.com>.
I think I can offer a somewhat unique perspective. As an "outsider" to
Struts and someone who has spent 3 years living in the "WebWork
world", I only recently many of the Struts developers and community
this week at ApacheCon. Having been in a room talking about this very
issue with Ted, Don, Craig, Martin, Neil, Clinton, and others, I can
say without a doubt that everyone is on board with this vision of
Struts as a community and two parallel frameworks.
More so, we are all in agreement that we will collaborate wherever
possible, including:
- common set of Java 5 annotations
- similar style configuration tricks (auto-reloading, consistent use
of DTD or XML schema, etc)
- validation engine
- internationalization
- possibly some tags even
I'd also like to add that whatever the history has been, today I see
Struts as a unique offering. In the web development space (regardless
of language), there are two schools of thoughts:
- action frameworks: bind requests to methods in beans
- event/component frameworks: don't worry about URLs as much and bind to events
I think it is fair to say that marketplace of developers has not yet
decided that one of these is a clear "winner". Struts, as a community,
is uniquely positioned to offer both options and is best prepared for
the day when that winner is declared. We all agreed that when that day
comes, by working together in other areas (validation, i18n, config,
annotations, etc) not only will the code be easy to merge, but the
community will be too. No other web development community offers this.
As someone who has said some pretty disparaging remarks about Struts
technolog and community in the part (I'll do the google search for
you: http://blogs.opensymphony.com/plightbo/2003/10/webwork_docaday_struts_really.html),
I can comfortably say I made a big mistake in choosing to create a
divide but that I've learned from that mistake and that is why I am
here today.
And I believe that everyone in the Struts community is also on board
to continue the grow the spirit of cooperation, not only between
Struts Action and WebWork, but between Struts Action and Struts Shale.
Patrick
On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fz...@omnytex.com> wrote:
> I think it is fair to say that many of us have made similar comments over
> the past few months, and have every time been basically told that it is
> our problem we are not "getting it". Usually we've been told nicely, but
> not always. That isn't the point though, The point is that this is not a
> new complaint by any stretch, and it has previously been dismissed on many
> occasions by more than one person.
>
> --
> Frank W. Zammetti
> Founder and Chief Software Architect
> Omnytex Technologies
> http://www.omnytex.com
> AIM: fzammetti
> Yahoo: fzammetti
> MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
>
> On Fri, December 16, 2005 10:37 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
> > This sounds familiar :)
> >
> > I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
> > presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
> >
> > http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
> >
> > Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
> > Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and clear
> > on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
> > frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> > On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at significant
> >> conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next
> >> Struts",
> >> you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
> >> baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have read
> >> all
> >> about the Trojan Horse.
> >>
> >> On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a subproject
> >> > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
> >> >
> >> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
> >> >
> >> > -- Paul
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Craig
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> >> back."
> >> ~Dakota Jack~
> >>
> >>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
I think it is fair to say that many of us have made similar comments over
the past few months, and have every time been basically told that it is
our problem we are not "getting it". Usually we've been told nicely, but
not always. That isn't the point though, The point is that this is not a
new complaint by any stretch, and it has previously been dismissed on many
occasions by more than one person.
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
AIM: fzammetti
Yahoo: fzammetti
MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
On Fri, December 16, 2005 10:37 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
> This sounds familiar :)
>
> I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
> presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
>
> http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
>
> Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
> Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and clear
> on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
> frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
>
> Patrick
>
> On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at significant
>> conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next
>> Struts",
>> you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
>> baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have read
>> all
>> about the Trojan Horse.
>>
>> On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a subproject
>> > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
>> >
>> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
>> >
>> > -- Paul
>> >
>> >
>> > Craig
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
>> back."
>> ~Dakota Jack~
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
Some instruction for you, Sean: I hope this helps. If not, it cannot hurt.
Description of Poisoning the Well
This sort of "reasoning" involves trying to discredit what a person might
later claim by presenting unfavorable information (be it true or false)
about the person. This "argument" has the following form:
1. Unfavorable information (be it true or false) about person A is
presented.
2. Therefore any claims person A makes will be false.
This sort of "reasoning" is obviously fallacious. The person making such an
attack is hoping that the unfavorable information will bias listeners
against the person in question and hence that they will reject any claims he
might make. However, merely presenting unfavorable information about a
person (even if it is true) hardly counts as evidence against the claims
he/she might make. This is especially clear when Poisoning the Well is
looked at as a form of ad Homimem in which the attack is made prior to the
person even making the claim or claims. The following example clearly shows
that this sort of "reasoning" is quite poor.
Before Class:
Bill: "Boy, that professor is a real jerk. I think he is some sort of
eurocentric fascist."
Jill: "Yeah."
During Class:
Prof. Jones: "...and so we see that there was never any 'Golden Age of
Matriarchy' in 1895 in America."
After Class:
Bill: "See what I mean?"
Jill: "Yeah. There must have been a Golden Age of Matriarchy, since that
jerk said there wasn't."
Examples of Poisoning the Well
1. "Don't listen to him, he's a scoundrel."
2. "Before turning the floor over to my opponent, I ask you to
remember that those who oppose my plans do not have the best wishes of the
university at heart."
3. You are told, prior to meeting him, that your friend's boyfriend is
a decadent wastrel. When you meet him, everything you hear him say is
tainted.
Description of Straw Man
The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's
actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented
version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following
pattern:
1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version
of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself.
One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the
person.
Examples of Straw Man
1. Prof. Jones: "The university just cut our yearly budget by
$10,000."
Prof. Smith: "What are we going to do?"
Prof. Brown: "I think we should eliminate one of the teaching
assistant positions. That would take care of it."
Prof. Jones: "We could reduce our scheduled raises instead."
Prof. Brown: " I can't understand why you want to bleed us dry like
that, Jones."
2. "Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack submarine
program. I disagree entirely. I can't understand why he wants to leave us
defenseless like that."
3. Bill and Jill are arguing about cleaning out their closets:
Jill: "We should clean out the closets. They are getting a bit messy."
Bill: "Why, we just went through those closets last year. Do we have
to clean them out everyday?"
Jill: "I never said anything about cleaning them out every day. You
just want too keep all your junk forever, which is just ridiculous."
Also Known as: Ad Hominem Abusive.
Description of Personal Attack
A personal attack is committed when a person substitutes abusive remarks for
evidence when attacking another person's claim or claims. This line of
"reasoning" is fallacious because the attack is directed at the person
making the claim and not the claim itself. The truth value of a claim is
independent of the person making the claim. After all, no matter how
repugnant an individual might be, he or she can still make true claims.
Not all ad Hominems are fallacious. In some cases, an individual's
characteristics can have a bearing on the question of the veracity of her
claims. For example, if someone is shown to be a pathological liar, then
what he says can be considered to be unreliable. However, such attacks are
weak, since even pathological liars might speak the truth on occasion.
In general, it is best to focus one's attention on the content of the claim
and not on who made the claim. It is the content that determines the truth
of the claim and not the characteristics of the person making the claim.
Examples of Personal Attack
1. In a school debate, Bill claims that the President's economic plan
is unrealistic. His opponent, a professor, retorts by saying "the freshman
has his facts wrong."
2. "This theory about a potential cure for cancer has been introduced
by a doctor who is a known lesbian feminist. I don't see why we should
extend an invitation for her to speak at the World Conference on Cancer."
3. "Bill says that we should give tax breaks to companies. But he is
untrustworthy, so it must be wrong to do that."
4. "That claim cannot be true. Dave believes it, and we know how
morally repulsive he is."
5. "Bill claims that Jane would be a good treasurer. However I find
Bill's behavior offensive, so I'm not going to vote for Jill."
6. "Jane says that drug use is morally wrong, but she is just a
goody-two shoes Christian, so we don't have to listen to her."
7. Bill: "I don't think it is a good idea to cut social programs."
Jill: "Why not?"
Bill: "Well, many people do not get a fair start in life and hence
need some help. After all, some people have wealthy parents and have it
fairly easy. Others are born into poverty and..."
Jill: "You just say that stuff because you have a soft heart and an
equally soft head."
Also Known as: Appeal to Mockery, The Horse Laugh.
Description of Appeal to Ridicule
The Appeal to Ridicule is a fallacy in which ridicule or mockery is
substituted for evidence in an "argument." This line of "reasoning" has the
following form:
1. X, which is some form of ridicule is presented (typically directed
at the claim).
2. Therefore claim C is false.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because mocking a claim does not show
that it is false. This is especially clear in the following example: "1+1=2!
That's the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard!"
It should be noted that showing that a claim is ridiculous through the use
of legitimate methods (such as a non fallacious argument) can make it
reasonable to reject the claim. One form of this line of reasoning is known
as a "reductio ad absurdum" ("reducing to absurdity"). In this sort of
argument, the idea is to show that a contradiction (a statement that must be
false) or an absurd result follows from a claim. For example: "Bill claims
that a member of a minority group cannot be a racist. However, this is
absurd. Think about this: white males are a minority in the world. Given
Bill's claim, it would follow that no white males could be racists. Hence,
the Klan, Nazis, and white supremists are not racist organizations."
Since the claim that the Klan, Nazis, and white supremists are not racist
organizations is clearly absurd, it can be concluded that the claim that a
member of a minority cannot be a racist is false.
Examples of Appeal to Ridicule
1. "Sure my worthy opponent claims that we should lower tuition, but
that is just laughable."
2. "Support the ERA? Sure, when the women start paying for the drinks!
Hah! Hah!"
3. "Those wacky conservatives! They think a strong military is the key
to peace!"
Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or
"against the person."
An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or
argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author
of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy
involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making
the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character,
circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this
attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in
question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the
following form:
1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
3. Therefore A's claim is false.
The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the
character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have
a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of
the argument being made).
Example of Ad Hominem
1. Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally wrong."
Dave: "Of course you would say that, you're a priest."
Bill: "What about the arguments I gave to support my position?"
Dave: "Those don't count. Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to
say that abortion is wrong. Further, you are just a lackey to the Pope, so I
can't believe what you say."
Description of Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
This fallacy is committed when it is concluded that a person's claim is
false because 1) it is inconsistent with something else a person has said or
2) what a person says is inconsistent with her actions. This type of
"argument" has the following form:
1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B asserts that A's actions or past claims are inconsistent
with the truth of claim X.
3. Therefore X is false.
The fact that a person makes inconsistent claims does not make any
particular claim he makes false (although of any pair of inconsistent claims
only one can be true - but both can be false). Also, the fact that a
person's claims are not consistent with his actions might indicate that the
person is a hypocrite but this does not prove his claims are false.
Examples of Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
1. Bill: "Smoking is very unhealthy and leads to all sorts of
problems. So take my advice and never start."
Jill: "Well, I certainly don't want to get cancer."
Bill: "I'm going to get a smoke. Want to join me Dave?"
Jill: "Well, I guess smoking can't be that bad. After all, Bill
smokes."
2. Jill: "I think the gun control bill shouldn't be supported because
it won't be effective and will waste money."
Bill: "Well, just last month you supported the bill. So I guess you're
wrong now."
3. Peter: "Based on the arguments I have presented, it is evident that
it is morally wrong to use animals for food or clothing."
Bill: "But you are wearing a leather jacket and you have a roast beef
sandwich in your hand! How can you say that using animals for food and
clothing is wrong!"
Description of Appeal to Emotion
An Appeal to Emotion is a fallacy with the following structure:
1. Favorable emotions are associated with X.
2. Therefore, X is true.
This fallacy is committed when someone manipulates peoples' emotions in
order to get them to accept a claim as being true. More formally, this sort
of "reasoning" involves the substitution of various means of producing
strong emotions in place of evidence for a claim. If the favorable emotions
associated with X influence the person to accept X as true because they
"feel good about X," then he has fallen prey to the fallacy.
This sort of "reasoning" is very common in politics and it serves as the
basis for a large portion of modern advertising. Most political speeches are
aimed at generating feelings in people so that these feelings will get them
to vote or act a certain way. in the case of advertising, the commercials
are aimed at evoking emotions that will influence people to buy certain
products. In most cases, such speeches and commercials are notoriously free
of real evidence.
This sort of "reasoning" is quite evidently fallacious. It is fallacious
because using various tactics to incite emotions in people does not serve as
evidence for a claim. For example, if a person were able to inspire in a
person an incredible hatred of the claim that 1+1 = 2 and then inspired the
person to love the claim that 1+1 = 3, it would hardly follow that the claim
that 1+1 = 3 would be adequately supported.
It should be noted that in many cases it is not particularly obvious that
the person committing the fallacy is attempting to support a claim. In many
cases, the user of the fallacy will appear to be attempting to move people
to take an action, such as buying a product or fighting in a war. However,
it is possible to determine what sort of claim the person is actually
attempting to support. In such cases one needs to ask "what sort of claim is
this person attempting to get people to accept and act on?" Determining this
claim (or claims) might take some work. However, in many cases it will be
quite evident. For example, if a political leader is attempting to convince
her followers to participate in certain acts of violence by the use of a
hate speech, then her claim would be "you should participate in these acts
of violence." In this case, the "evidence" would be the hatred evoked in the
followers. This hatred would serve to make them favorable inclined towards
the claim that they should engage in the acts of violence. As another
example, a beer commercial might show happy, scantily clad men and women
prancing about a beach, guzzling beer. In this case the claim would be "you
should buy this beer." The "evidence" would be the excitement evoked by
seeing the beautiful people guzzling the beer.
This fallacy is actually an extremely effective persuasive device. As many
people have argued, peoples' emotions often carry much more force than their
reason. Logical argumentation is often difficult and time consuming and it
rarely has the power to spurn people to action. It is the power of this
fallacy that explains its great popularity and wide usage. However, it is
still a fallacy.
In all fairness it must be noted that the use of tactics to inspire emotions
is an important skill. Without an appeal to peoples' emotions, it is often
difficult to get them to take action or to perform at their best. For
example, no good coach presents her team with syllogisms before the big
game. Instead she inspires them with emotional terms and attempts to "fire"
them up. There is nothing inherently wrong with this. However, it is not any
acceptable form of argumentation. As long as one is able to clearly
distinguish between what inspires emotions and what justifies a claim, one
is unlikely to fall prey to this fallacy.
As a final point, in many cases it will be difficult to distinguish an
Appeal to Emotion from some other fallacies and in many cases multiple
fallacies may be committed. For example, many Ad
Hominem<http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html>s
will be very similar to Appeals to Emotion and, in some cases, both
fallacies will be committed. As an example, a leader might attempt to invoke
hatred of a person to inspire his followers to accept that they should
reject her claims. The same attack could function as an Appeal to Emotion
and a Personal Attack<http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/personal-attack.html>.
In the first case, the attack would be aimed at making the followers feel
very favorable about rejecting her claims. In the second case, the attack
would be aimed at making the followers reject the person's claims because of
some perceived (or imagined) defect in her character.
This fallacy is related to the Appeal to
Popularity<http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html>fallacy.
Despite the differences between these two fallacies, they are both
united by the fact that they involve appeals to emotions. In both cases the
fallacies aim at getting people to accept claims based on how they or others
feel about the claims and not based on evidence for the claims.
Another way to look at these two fallacies is as follows
Appeal to Popularity<http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html>
1. Most people approve of X.
2. So, I should approve of X, too.
3. Since I approve of X, X must be true.
Appeal to Emotion
1. I approve of X.
2. Therefore, X is true.
On this view, in an Appeal to
Popularity<http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html>the
claim is accepted because most people approve of the claim. In the
case
of an Appeal to Emotion the claim is accepted because the individual
approves of the claim because of the emotion of approval he feels in regards
to the claim.
Examples of Appeal to Emotion
1. The new PowerTangerine computer gives you the power you need. If
you buy one, people will envy your power. They will look up to you and wish
they were just like you. You will know the true joy of power.
TangerinePower.
2. The new UltraSkinny diet will make you feel great. No longer be
troubled by your weight. Enjoy the admiring stares of the opposite sex.
Revel in your new freedom from fat. You will know true happiness if you try
our diet!
3. Bill goes to hear a politician speak. The politician tells the
crowd about the evils of the government and the need to throw out the
peoople who are currently in office. After hearing the speach, Bill is full
of hatred for the current politicians. Because of this, he feels good about
getting rid of the old politicians and accepts that it is the right thing to
do because of how he feels.
On 12/16/05, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> FYI Dakota Jack is a troll. Please don't encourage him, even if you
> agree with his position.
>
> sean
>
> On 12/16/05, Patrick Lightbody <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This sounds familiar :)
> >
> > I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
> > presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
> >
> >
> http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
> >
> > Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
> > Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and clear
> > on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
> > frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> > On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at significant
> > > conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next
> Struts",
> > > you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
> > > baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have read
> all
> > > about the Trojan Horse.
> > >
> > > On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a
> subproject
> > > > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
> > > >
> > > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
> > > >
> > > > -- Paul
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Craig
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> back."
> > > ~Dakota Jack~
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com>.
FYI Dakota Jack is a troll. Please don't encourage him, even if you
agree with his position.
sean
On 12/16/05, Patrick Lightbody <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This sounds familiar :)
>
> I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
> presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
>
> http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
>
> Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
> Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and clear
> on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
> frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
>
> Patrick
>
> On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at significant
> > conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next Struts",
> > you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
> > baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have read all
> > about the Trojan Horse.
> >
> > On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a subproject
> > > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
> > >
> > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
> > >
> > > -- Paul
> > >
> > >
> > > Craig
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
> > ~Dakota Jack~
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org>.
On 12/16/05, Patrick Lightbody <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This sounds familiar :)
>
> I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
> presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
>
>
> http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
>
> Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
> Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and clear
> on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
> frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
Based on your comments at the BOF, I submitted a request to change that
title (which had been submitted even before the ApacheCon talk :-).
Patrick
Craig
On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at significant
> > conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next
> Struts",
> > you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
> > baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have read
> all
> > about the Trojan Horse.
> >
> > On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a subproject
> > > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
> > >
> > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
> > >
> > > -- Paul
> > >
> > >
> > > Craig
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> back."
> > ~Dakota Jack~
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
I think it is fair to say that many of us have made similar comments over
the past few months, and have every time been basically told that it is
our problem we are not "getting it". Usually we've been told nicely, but
not always. That isn't the point though, The point is that this is not a
new complaint by any stretch, and it has previously been dismissed on many
occasions by more than one person.
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
AIM: fzammetti
Yahoo: fzammetti
MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
On Fri, December 16, 2005 10:37 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
> This sounds familiar :)
>
> I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
> presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
>
> http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
>
> Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
> Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and clear
> on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
> frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
>
> Patrick
>
> On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at significant
>> conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next
>> Struts",
>> you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
>> baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have read
>> all
>> about the Trojan Horse.
>>
>> On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a subproject
>> > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
>> >
>> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
>> >
>> > -- Paul
>> >
>> >
>> > Craig
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
>> back."
>> ~Dakota Jack~
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Patrick Lightbody <pl...@gmail.com>.
This sounds familiar :)
I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and clear
on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
Patrick
On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at significant
> conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next Struts",
> you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
> baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have read all
> about the Trojan Horse.
>
> On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a subproject
> > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
> >
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
> >
> > -- Paul
> >
> >
> > Craig
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
> ~Dakota Jack~
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at significant
conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next Struts",
you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have read all
about the Trojan Horse.
On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a subproject
> occurred nearly 11 months ago:
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
>
> -- Paul
>
>
> Craig
>
>
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at significant
conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next Struts",
you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
baloney. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have read all
about the Trojan Horse.
On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a subproject
> occurred nearly 11 months ago:
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
>
> -- Paul
>
>
> Craig
>
>
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org>.
On 12/15/05, Paul Benedict <pa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Dakota,
>
> Last week, I wrote about three messages voicing my opinon that I think it
> is an error to accept
> Shale under the Struts banner. I still hold that to be true, but I also
> see the justification of
> the commiters, which are:
>
> [1] Struts is now an "umbrella" label to contain MANY frameworks. As the
> old Action 1.x framework
> phases out, others will come in like WebWork/Struts 2.x, Shale, etc.
>
> [2] Many companies recognize the Struts label, so having Shale called
> Struts Shale allows your
> manager to instantly buy into the technology.
>
> [3] IBM has certified Struts; so this is certification for Shale too (ala
> point #2).
>
> [4] Sharing the Struts community with Shale is a big win for JSF.
>
> I can't really argue with these opinions; their reasoning is sound. The
> philosophy is certainly
> much different than mine and I prefer Struts to be the name of ONE
> FRAMEWORK ONLY TO PREVENT
> BRANDING DILUTION, but I was told by a Commiter "what difference does it
> make to you?" Well I
> certainly won't be caring anymore with that kind of response :) I cared
> because I was interested
> in not diluting the brand name but... I can only care so much since, in
> reality, it's not my
> decision and responsibility anyway.
By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a subproject
occurred nearly 11 months ago:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
-- Paul
Craig
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org>.
On 12/15/05, Paul Benedict <pa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Dakota,
>
> Last week, I wrote about three messages voicing my opinon that I think it
> is an error to accept
> Shale under the Struts banner. I still hold that to be true, but I also
> see the justification of
> the commiters, which are:
>
> [1] Struts is now an "umbrella" label to contain MANY frameworks. As the
> old Action 1.x framework
> phases out, others will come in like WebWork/Struts 2.x, Shale, etc.
>
> [2] Many companies recognize the Struts label, so having Shale called
> Struts Shale allows your
> manager to instantly buy into the technology.
>
> [3] IBM has certified Struts; so this is certification for Shale too (ala
> point #2).
>
> [4] Sharing the Struts community with Shale is a big win for JSF.
>
> I can't really argue with these opinions; their reasoning is sound. The
> philosophy is certainly
> much different than mine and I prefer Struts to be the name of ONE
> FRAMEWORK ONLY TO PREVENT
> BRANDING DILUTION, but I was told by a Commiter "what difference does it
> make to you?" Well I
> certainly won't be caring anymore with that kind of response :) I cared
> because I was interested
> in not diluting the brand name but... I can only care so much since, in
> reality, it's not my
> decision and responsibility anyway.
By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a subproject
occurred nearly 11 months ago:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
-- Paul
Craig
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Paul Benedict <pa...@yahoo.com>.
Dakota,
Last week, I wrote about three messages voicing my opinon that I think it is an error to accept
Shale under the Struts banner. I still hold that to be true, but I also see the justification of
the commiters, which are:
[1] Struts is now an "umbrella" label to contain MANY frameworks. As the old Action 1.x framework
phases out, others will come in like WebWork/Struts 2.x, Shale, etc.
[2] Many companies recognize the Struts label, so having Shale called Struts Shale allows your
manager to instantly buy into the technology.
[3] IBM has certified Struts; so this is certification for Shale too (ala point #2).
[4] Sharing the Struts community with Shale is a big win for JSF.
I can't really argue with these opinions; their reasoning is sound. The philosophy is certainly
much different than mine and I prefer Struts to be the name of ONE FRAMEWORK ONLY TO PREVENT
BRANDING DILUTION, but I was told by a Commiter "what difference does it make to you?" Well I
certainly won't be caring anymore with that kind of response :) I cared because I was interested
in not diluting the brand name but... I can only care so much since, in reality, it's not my
decision and responsibility anyway.
-- Paul
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
This reads like Shale is not only a proposal but part of Struts. Is that
true? If that is true, can someone explain how that happened? What the
process was?
On 12/14/05, Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> 14 Dec 2005 - To give JavaServer Faces developers a head start on building
> scalable web applications for the enterprise, Apache Struts now offers the
> Shale Framework. Like the original "Struts Action Framework", Shale
> provides
> developers with a front controller, and several other components, to
> provide
> the "invisible underpinnings that hold an application together".
>
> "When JavaServer Faces arrived," explains the Struts website, "our
> development community chose to 'make new friends but keep the old'. Some
> of
> us want (or need) to stick with the original request-based framework.
> Others
> are ready to switch to an component-based framework that builds on
> JavaServer Faces. We offer both frameworks because we have volunteers to
> create and maintain both frameworks."
>
> Shale is based on the recently standardized JavaServer Faces APIs, and
> focuses on adding value, rather than redundantly implementing features
> that
> JSF already provides. Shale will run on any compliant JSF implementation,
> including the one being developed by the Apache MyFaces project. It also
> includes many features that Struts users appreciate, such as supporting
> client side validation and the Tiles framework.
>
> Struts Shale was discussed by Craig McClanahan in a talk at ApacheCon on
> Tuesday, December 13, 2005, entitled "Shale: The Next Struts??". Slides
> from
> the talk are available online [
> http://people.apache.org/~craigmcc/apachecon-2005-shale.pdf].
>
> For more about Shale, visit the Struts Shale website [
> http://struts.apache.org/struts-shale/].
>
>
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
This reads like Shale is not only a proposal but part of Struts. Is that
true? If that is true, can someone explain how that happened? What the
process was?
On 12/14/05, Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> 14 Dec 2005 - To give JavaServer Faces developers a head start on building
> scalable web applications for the enterprise, Apache Struts now offers the
> Shale Framework. Like the original "Struts Action Framework", Shale
> provides
> developers with a front controller, and several other components, to
> provide
> the "invisible underpinnings that hold an application together".
>
> "When JavaServer Faces arrived," explains the Struts website, "our
> development community chose to 'make new friends but keep the old'. Some
> of
> us want (or need) to stick with the original request-based framework.
> Others
> are ready to switch to an component-based framework that builds on
> JavaServer Faces. We offer both frameworks because we have volunteers to
> create and maintain both frameworks."
>
> Shale is based on the recently standardized JavaServer Faces APIs, and
> focuses on adding value, rather than redundantly implementing features
> that
> JSF already provides. Shale will run on any compliant JSF implementation,
> including the one being developed by the Apache MyFaces project. It also
> includes many features that Struts users appreciate, such as supporting
> client side validation and the Tiles framework.
>
> Struts Shale was discussed by Craig McClanahan in a talk at ApacheCon on
> Tuesday, December 13, 2005, entitled "Shale: The Next Struts??". Slides
> from
> the talk are available online [
> http://people.apache.org/~craigmcc/apachecon-2005-shale.pdf].
>
> For more about Shale, visit the Struts Shale website [
> http://struts.apache.org/struts-shale/].
>
>
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~