You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@struts.apache.org by Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> on 2006/03/29 23:18:38 UTC
The Mytical stagnation
Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than Struts
1.X. So the problem seems to be that two groups trying to achieve the
same thing have come together and merged. Hang on a sec .... that's NOT
a problem. The struts guys saw that webworks was good and adopted it.
GREAT, BRILLIANT! They are DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE USERS, i.e. US!
Just because you switch to a new track does NOT mean you have stagnated!
It means you are moving foward in a positive manner. How on earth can
that be a bad thing and how on earth can such obvious progress forward
be stagnation!
By Jon's "logic" Windows development stagnated when the Windows ME
code-base was abandoned and MS have serious questions to answer as to
why they moved on to a better technology (WinNT Code Base). Not to
Mention Apple really stagnated when they moved from OS 9 to the NeXT
based OS X.
Besides, since I started using struts about 9 months ago Struts have
moved on at least 5 minor versions, that's hardly stagnent now is it!
Stuts is moving FORWARD, the struts code base has been STRENGTHENED by
the inclusion of WebWorks, where on earth is this mythical stagnation?
The only thing here that seems stagnent to me are John's posts. They are
just the same thing over and over and over and over and over .........
again. We get it Jon, we know what you think, it's just that not
everyone agrees with you and no matter how many times you say the same
thing everyone will NEVER agree with you!
This topic is dead, it has been for weeks, can we now please do the
honourable thing and bury it!
Bart.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie>.
Dakota Jack wrote:
>Bart, if you don't think there is a problem, move on. There is nothing here
>for you. I can only imagine that your involvement in Struts is at the level
>of playing, if this is your attitude. I have left tinker toys behind and am
>trying to deliver to real world problems.
>
>
and again with the pointless insulting. I am not playing with toys, I'm
tackelling cutting edge problems that are good enough to get published
in journals. But if it makes you feel better to think of me as a pleb
who's not doing anything useful then by all means carry on, it doesn't
bother me. In fact your posts give me a great laugh.
>I hardly think that "everyone" on a project that failed would be clamoring
>to support a discussion of their failure. That would happen on a project
>that succeeded. People that succeed tend to like to look at their work and
>to learn from failures. People that fail hate it. So, your reasoning is
>quite skewed. Of course, it is obvious that you have no intention of
>reasoning.
>
>
>
Sigh .... you missed my point there. Obviously the developers would not
be queuing up to insult themselves (also, with yourself and Jon around
there would be no need for them to insult themselves, yee are great at
it). However, if they had really made such a mess of it don't you think
that vast numbers of annoyed users would be posting here agreeing with
your self and Jon? You'll notice of course that that is not the case. We
can all draw our own conclusions from that fact. Me, personally, I draw
the conclusion that people are not voicing their agreement because they
don't agree.
>I am just trying to keep the dialogue going long enough to get a message
>across that it is okay and even good to discuss difficulties. This is a
>very valuable thing to learn in work, as well in life, Bart. I recommend
>it.
>
>Do you get that?
>
>
Yup, I also have an understanding of concepts like spamming and trolling
which you appear to be lacking in. Also good skills to develope for both
life in general and work.
Regards,
Bart.
>On 4/1/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
>
>
>>Right,
>>
>>You assume that Struts 1 was a disaster and was messed up. Not all of us
>>agree with you. I for one don't. If you look at it from my point of view
>>and that of the others who agree with me there is no big burning
>>question to be answered because there was no massive cockup. If everyone
>>agreed with you this list would be full of people clamouring to support
>>you in your just cause. It doesn't appear to be so I would guess you are
>>in the minority.
>>
>>Bart.
>>
>>Dakota Jack wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Do you think there is any value in letting a situtation which led to the
>>>problem go by without lessons learned, Paul? Do you think just because
>>>
>>>
>>the
>>
>>
>>>people who coded the hairball are not talking about it we should just let
>>>
>>>
>>it
>>
>>
>>>drop and believe that they won't do the same thing with WebWorks? Is
>>>
>>>
>>that
>>
>>
>>>what you think? You do seem to get the fact that there is a real,
>>>unaddressed problem. I don't think we need you to tell us when we should
>>>stop talking. If you don't get it, then move on. Noone is holding your
>>>nose to this grindstone. I am amazed when people are concerned that
>>>
>>>
>>others
>>
>>
>>>are addressing an issue. What is with that? If you are tired of talking
>>>
>>>
>>we
>>
>>
>>>should stop? That is a very odd way to think.
>>>
>>>On 3/29/06, Paul Benedict <pa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>This topic has become stale, in my opinion, and I do not understand
>>>>why people continue to participate in it. When people attempt to have
>>>>a successful discussion, there is usually a goal to attain, but I am
>>>>unable to discern what serious goal there is in telling the commiters
>>>>
>>>>
>>they
>>
>>
>>>>are, in so many words, lousy, a failure, makers of bad products, the
>>>>fathers of stagnation, betrayers of their foundation, etc. :-)
>>>>Discussions can be alot of fun and productive and bear good fruit,
>>>>but discussions, like fruit, also wither after a season.... and I think
>>>>the season is well underway for all the participants to just accept
>>>>that you've been heard, not everyone will agree, and finger-pointing
>>>>isn't productive. -- Paul
>>>>
>>>>--- Al Eridani <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
>>>>>>guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>Struts
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>1.X.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>And you see it wrongly. Either you came late into this and could not be
>>>>>bothered to check the archives or your attention span is so short that
>>>>>you have forgotten already.
>>>>>
>>>>>It all started when some Struts committers described their relatively
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>closed
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>environment (limiting who could contribute) and Jonathan wondered
>>>>>aloud whether that lack of openness had been a contributing factor to
>>>>>Struts decline.
>>>>>
>>>>>The question was never addressed because, in the inmortal words of one
>>>>>of the defenders of the faith, "the question is invalid".
>>>>>
>>>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>__________________________________________________
>>>>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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>--
>>>"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~
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
Bart, if you don't think there is a problem, move on. There is nothing here
for you. I can only imagine that your involvement in Struts is at the level
of playing, if this is your attitude. I have left tinker toys behind and am
trying to deliver to real world problems.
I hardly think that "everyone" on a project that failed would be clamoring
to support a discussion of their failure. That would happen on a project
that succeeded. People that succeed tend to like to look at their work and
to learn from failures. People that fail hate it. So, your reasoning is
quite skewed. Of course, it is obvious that you have no intention of
reasoning.
I am just trying to keep the dialogue going long enough to get a message
across that it is okay and even good to discuss difficulties. This is a
very valuable thing to learn in work, as well in life, Bart. I recommend
it.
Do you get that?
On 4/1/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
>
> Right,
>
> You assume that Struts 1 was a disaster and was messed up. Not all of us
> agree with you. I for one don't. If you look at it from my point of view
> and that of the others who agree with me there is no big burning
> question to be answered because there was no massive cockup. If everyone
> agreed with you this list would be full of people clamouring to support
> you in your just cause. It doesn't appear to be so I would guess you are
> in the minority.
>
> Bart.
>
> Dakota Jack wrote:
>
> >Do you think there is any value in letting a situtation which led to the
> >problem go by without lessons learned, Paul? Do you think just because
> the
> >people who coded the hairball are not talking about it we should just let
> it
> >drop and believe that they won't do the same thing with WebWorks? Is
> that
> >what you think? You do seem to get the fact that there is a real,
> >unaddressed problem. I don't think we need you to tell us when we should
> >stop talking. If you don't get it, then move on. Noone is holding your
> >nose to this grindstone. I am amazed when people are concerned that
> others
> >are addressing an issue. What is with that? If you are tired of talking
> we
> >should stop? That is a very odd way to think.
> >
> >On 3/29/06, Paul Benedict <pa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>This topic has become stale, in my opinion, and I do not understand
> >>why people continue to participate in it. When people attempt to have
> >>a successful discussion, there is usually a goal to attain, but I am
> >>unable to discern what serious goal there is in telling the commiters
> they
> >>are, in so many words, lousy, a failure, makers of bad products, the
> >>fathers of stagnation, betrayers of their foundation, etc. :-)
> >>Discussions can be alot of fun and productive and bear good fruit,
> >>but discussions, like fruit, also wither after a season.... and I think
> >>the season is well underway for all the participants to just accept
> >>that you've been heard, not everyone will agree, and finger-pointing
> >>isn't productive. -- Paul
> >>
> >>--- Al Eridani <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
> >>>>guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>Struts
> >>
> >>
> >>>>1.X.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>And you see it wrongly. Either you came late into this and could not be
> >>>bothered to check the archives or your attention span is so short that
> >>>you have forgotten already.
> >>>
> >>>It all started when some Struts committers described their relatively
> >>>
> >>>
> >>closed
> >>
> >>
> >>>environment (limiting who could contribute) and Jonathan wondered
> >>>aloud whether that lack of openness had been a contributing factor to
> >>>Struts decline.
> >>>
> >>>The question was never addressed because, in the inmortal words of one
> >>>of the defenders of the faith, "the question is invalid".
> >>>
> >>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> >>>For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>__________________________________________________
> >>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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >--
> >"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: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie>.
Right,
You assume that Struts 1 was a disaster and was messed up. Not all of us
agree with you. I for one don't. If you look at it from my point of view
and that of the others who agree with me there is no big burning
question to be answered because there was no massive cockup. If everyone
agreed with you this list would be full of people clamouring to support
you in your just cause. It doesn't appear to be so I would guess you are
in the minority.
Bart.
Dakota Jack wrote:
>Do you think there is any value in letting a situtation which led to the
>problem go by without lessons learned, Paul? Do you think just because the
>people who coded the hairball are not talking about it we should just let it
>drop and believe that they won't do the same thing with WebWorks? Is that
>what you think? You do seem to get the fact that there is a real,
>unaddressed problem. I don't think we need you to tell us when we should
>stop talking. If you don't get it, then move on. Noone is holding your
>nose to this grindstone. I am amazed when people are concerned that others
>are addressing an issue. What is with that? If you are tired of talking we
>should stop? That is a very odd way to think.
>
>On 3/29/06, Paul Benedict <pa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>This topic has become stale, in my opinion, and I do not understand
>>why people continue to participate in it. When people attempt to have
>>a successful discussion, there is usually a goal to attain, but I am
>>unable to discern what serious goal there is in telling the commiters they
>>are, in so many words, lousy, a failure, makers of bad products, the
>>fathers of stagnation, betrayers of their foundation, etc. :-)
>>Discussions can be alot of fun and productive and bear good fruit,
>>but discussions, like fruit, also wither after a season.... and I think
>>the season is well underway for all the participants to just accept
>>that you've been heard, not everyone will agree, and finger-pointing
>>isn't productive. -- Paul
>>
>>--- Al Eridani <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
>>>>guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than
>>>>
>>>>
>>Struts
>>
>>
>>>>1.X.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>And you see it wrongly. Either you came late into this and could not be
>>>bothered to check the archives or your attention span is so short that
>>>you have forgotten already.
>>>
>>>It all started when some Struts committers described their relatively
>>>
>>>
>>closed
>>
>>
>>>environment (limiting who could contribute) and Jonathan wondered
>>>aloud whether that lack of openness had been a contributing factor to
>>>Struts decline.
>>>
>>>The question was never addressed because, in the inmortal words of one
>>>of the defenders of the faith, "the question is invalid".
>>>
>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>>For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>__________________________________________________
>>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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>"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: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie>.
Well said!
Asad Habib wrote:
> Do WE think that Dakota has said his fair share and that his ideas are
> STALE? Do WE think that Dakota should stop harassing others on this list?
> Do WE think that too much Dakota talk is bad? Do WE think that Dakota
> is talking nonsense?
>
> Yes, indeed, WE do! Paul, I, and lots of others on this list THINK
> exactly this and have expressed this multiple times. I THINK it is
> time for Dakota to stop THINKING. What do you THINK, Dakota, o noble
> master of DO YOU THINK?
>
> - Asad
>
>
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2006, Dakota Jack wrote:
>
>> Do you think there is any value in letting a situtation which led to the
>> problem go by without lessons learned, Paul? Do you think just
>> because the
>> people who coded the hairball are not talking about it we should just
>> let it
>> drop and believe that they won't do the same thing with WebWorks? Is
>> that
>> what you think? You do seem to get the fact that there is a real,
>> unaddressed problem. I don't think we need you to tell us when we
>> should
>> stop talking. If you don't get it, then move on. Noone is holding your
>> nose to this grindstone. I am amazed when people are concerned that
>> others
>> are addressing an issue. What is with that? If you are tired of
>> talking we
>> should stop? That is a very odd way to think.
>>
>> On 3/29/06, Paul Benedict <pa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> This topic has become stale, in my opinion, and I do not understand
>>> why people continue to participate in it. When people attempt to have
>>> a successful discussion, there is usually a goal to attain, but I am
>>> unable to discern what serious goal there is in telling the
>>> commiters they
>>> are, in so many words, lousy, a failure, makers of bad products, the
>>> fathers of stagnation, betrayers of their foundation, etc. :-)
>>> Discussions can be alot of fun and productive and bear good fruit,
>>> but discussions, like fruit, also wither after a season.... and I think
>>> the season is well underway for all the participants to just accept
>>> that you've been heard, not everyone will agree, and finger-pointing
>>> isn't productive. -- Paul
>>>
>>> --- Al Eridani <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the
>>>>> struts
>>>>> guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than
>>>>
>>> Struts
>>>
>>>>> 1.X.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And you see it wrongly. Either you came late into this and could
>>>> not be
>>>> bothered to check the archives or your attention span is so short that
>>>> you have forgotten already.
>>>>
>>>> It all started when some Struts committers described their relatively
>>>
>>> closed
>>>
>>>> environment (limiting who could contribute) and Jonathan wondered
>>>> aloud whether that lack of openness had been a contributing factor to
>>>> Struts decline.
>>>>
>>>> The question was never addressed because, in the inmortal words of one
>>>> of the defenders of the faith, "the question is invalid".
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> "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
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <re...@wanadoo.es>.
Asad Habib wrote:
> Do WE think that Dakota has said his fair share and that his ideas are
> STALE? Do WE think that Dakota should stop harassing others on this list?
> Do WE think that too much Dakota talk is bad? Do WE think that Dakota is
> talking nonsense?
Well, the truth is that it's hard to know what the majority of people
think. Most of the people who subscribe to a mailing list like this just
lurk and never say anything.
Of course, the likelihood of them saying anything is further reduced if
they think they're going to be at the receiving end of insults and
browbeating and so on if they express an opinion.
Given this basic fact, I think all the WE in caps above is in rather bad
taste, frankly.
>
> Yes, indeed, WE do! Paul, I, and lots of others on this list THINK
> exactly this and have expressed this multiple times. I THINK it is
> time for Dakota to stop THINKING. What do you THINK, Dakota, o noble
> master of DO YOU THINK?
Asad, I was wondering what you actually thought of this question. All I
see looking back on your previous comments is that you think that other
poeple shouldn't express their opinion or should stop doing so or
whatever. If that, in and of itself, is an opinion, it's a rather
negative derivative kind of opinion. Okay, it's sarcastic, but you tell
Dakota in the above to "stop THINKING". Is it a case of: "I don't have
an opinion so other people also shouldn't?"
On the other hand, maybe I'm being unfair there. Maybe you actually do
have an opinion. Now, to me, it seems indisputable that Struts
development stagnated. It was falling behind other things in its space,
Webwork being just one prominent example. Bringing in Webwork and
relabeling it Struts Action 2 or whatever is a clear recognition of that
stagnation.
So, this naturally does lead to the question: Why did Struts development
stagnate?
This really should not be a taboo question.
Now, my own concern about this is what happens when a project that, for
whatever reasons, cannot maintain a significant level of active
development, absorbs an innovative project, and imposes its development
practices on them? I mean, things have to be judged by results, and on
the level of technical results, the Struts project has not been managed
successfully. (Note that I'm not talking about marketing/visibility here.)
So, I see a real problem here, particularly when the Struts people, for
the most part, simply won't countenance the possibility (the _glimmer_
of a possibility, I almost dare say) that there has been anything wrong
with their basic approach towards managing the project up until now.
Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>
> - Asad
>
>
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2006, Dakota Jack wrote:
>
>> Do you think there is any value in letting a situtation which led to the
>> problem go by without lessons learned, Paul? Do you think just
>> because the
>> people who coded the hairball are not talking about it we should just
>> let it
>> drop and believe that they won't do the same thing with WebWorks? Is
>> that
>> what you think? You do seem to get the fact that there is a real,
>> unaddressed problem. I don't think we need you to tell us when we should
>> stop talking. If you don't get it, then move on. Noone is holding your
>> nose to this grindstone. I am amazed when people are concerned that
>> others
>> are addressing an issue. What is with that? If you are tired of
>> talking we
>> should stop? That is a very odd way to think.
>>
>> On 3/29/06, Paul Benedict <pa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> This topic has become stale, in my opinion, and I do not understand
>>> why people continue to participate in it. When people attempt to have
>>> a successful discussion, there is usually a goal to attain, but I am
>>> unable to discern what serious goal there is in telling the commiters
>>> they
>>> are, in so many words, lousy, a failure, makers of bad products, the
>>> fathers of stagnation, betrayers of their foundation, etc. :-)
>>> Discussions can be alot of fun and productive and bear good fruit,
>>> but discussions, like fruit, also wither after a season.... and I think
>>> the season is well underway for all the participants to just accept
>>> that you've been heard, not everyone will agree, and finger-pointing
>>> isn't productive. -- Paul
>>>
>>> --- Al Eridani <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
>>>>> guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than
>>>
>>> Struts
>>>
>>>>> 1.X.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And you see it wrongly. Either you came late into this and could not be
>>>> bothered to check the archives or your attention span is so short that
>>>> you have forgotten already.
>>>>
>>>> It all started when some Struts committers described their relatively
>>>
>>> closed
>>>
>>>> environment (limiting who could contribute) and Jonathan wondered
>>>> aloud whether that lack of openness had been a contributing factor to
>>>> Struts decline.
>>>>
>>>> The question was never addressed because, in the inmortal words of one
>>>> of the defenders of the faith, "the question is invalid".
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> "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: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Asad Habib <ah...@engin.umich.edu>.
Do WE think that Dakota has said his fair share and that his ideas are
STALE? Do WE think that Dakota should stop harassing others on this list?
Do WE think that too much Dakota talk is bad? Do WE think that Dakota is
talking nonsense?
Yes, indeed, WE do! Paul, I, and lots of others on this list THINK
exactly this and have expressed this multiple times. I THINK it is
time for Dakota to stop THINKING. What do you THINK, Dakota, o noble
master of DO YOU THINK?
- Asad
On Fri, 31 Mar 2006, Dakota Jack wrote:
> Do you think there is any value in letting a situtation which led to the
> problem go by without lessons learned, Paul? Do you think just because the
> people who coded the hairball are not talking about it we should just let it
> drop and believe that they won't do the same thing with WebWorks? Is that
> what you think? You do seem to get the fact that there is a real,
> unaddressed problem. I don't think we need you to tell us when we should
> stop talking. If you don't get it, then move on. Noone is holding your
> nose to this grindstone. I am amazed when people are concerned that others
> are addressing an issue. What is with that? If you are tired of talking we
> should stop? That is a very odd way to think.
>
> On 3/29/06, Paul Benedict <pa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> This topic has become stale, in my opinion, and I do not understand
>> why people continue to participate in it. When people attempt to have
>> a successful discussion, there is usually a goal to attain, but I am
>> unable to discern what serious goal there is in telling the commiters they
>> are, in so many words, lousy, a failure, makers of bad products, the
>> fathers of stagnation, betrayers of their foundation, etc. :-)
>> Discussions can be alot of fun and productive and bear good fruit,
>> but discussions, like fruit, also wither after a season.... and I think
>> the season is well underway for all the participants to just accept
>> that you've been heard, not everyone will agree, and finger-pointing
>> isn't productive. -- Paul
>>
>> --- Al Eridani <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
>>>> Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
>>>> guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than
>> Struts
>>>> 1.X.
>>>
>>> And you see it wrongly. Either you came late into this and could not be
>>> bothered to check the archives or your attention span is so short that
>>> you have forgotten already.
>>>
>>> It all started when some Struts committers described their relatively
>> closed
>>> environment (limiting who could contribute) and Jonathan wondered
>>> aloud whether that lack of openness had been a contributing factor to
>>> Struts decline.
>>>
>>> The question was never addressed because, in the inmortal words of one
>>> of the defenders of the faith, "the question is invalid".
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> "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: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
Do you think there is any value in letting a situtation which led to the
problem go by without lessons learned, Paul? Do you think just because the
people who coded the hairball are not talking about it we should just let it
drop and believe that they won't do the same thing with WebWorks? Is that
what you think? You do seem to get the fact that there is a real,
unaddressed problem. I don't think we need you to tell us when we should
stop talking. If you don't get it, then move on. Noone is holding your
nose to this grindstone. I am amazed when people are concerned that others
are addressing an issue. What is with that? If you are tired of talking we
should stop? That is a very odd way to think.
On 3/29/06, Paul Benedict <pa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> This topic has become stale, in my opinion, and I do not understand
> why people continue to participate in it. When people attempt to have
> a successful discussion, there is usually a goal to attain, but I am
> unable to discern what serious goal there is in telling the commiters they
> are, in so many words, lousy, a failure, makers of bad products, the
> fathers of stagnation, betrayers of their foundation, etc. :-)
> Discussions can be alot of fun and productive and bear good fruit,
> but discussions, like fruit, also wither after a season.... and I think
> the season is well underway for all the participants to just accept
> that you've been heard, not everyone will agree, and finger-pointing
> isn't productive. -- Paul
>
> --- Al Eridani <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
> > > Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
> > > guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than
> Struts
> > > 1.X.
> >
> > And you see it wrongly. Either you came late into this and could not be
> > bothered to check the archives or your attention span is so short that
> > you have forgotten already.
> >
> > It all started when some Struts committers described their relatively
> closed
> > environment (limiting who could contribute) and Jonathan wondered
> > aloud whether that lack of openness had been a contributing factor to
> > Struts decline.
> >
> > The question was never addressed because, in the inmortal words of one
> > of the defenders of the faith, "the question is invalid".
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~
Re: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Paul Benedict <pa...@yahoo.com>.
This topic has become stale, in my opinion, and I do not understand
why people continue to participate in it. When people attempt to have
a successful discussion, there is usually a goal to attain, but I am
unable to discern what serious goal there is in telling the commiters they
are, in so many words, lousy, a failure, makers of bad products, the
fathers of stagnation, betrayers of their foundation, etc. :-)
Discussions can be alot of fun and productive and bear good fruit,
but discussions, like fruit, also wither after a season.... and I think
the season is well underway for all the participants to just accept
that you've been heard, not everyone will agree, and finger-pointing
isn't productive. -- Paul
--- Al Eridani <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
> > Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
> > guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than Struts
> > 1.X.
>
> And you see it wrongly. Either you came late into this and could not be
> bothered to check the archives or your attention span is so short that
> you have forgotten already.
>
> It all started when some Struts committers described their relatively closed
> environment (limiting who could contribute) and Jonathan wondered
> aloud whether that lack of openness had been a contributing factor to
> Struts decline.
>
> The question was never addressed because, in the inmortal words of one
> of the defenders of the faith, "the question is invalid".
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
__________________________________________________
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: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Al Eridani <al...@gmail.com>.
On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
> Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
> guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than Struts
> 1.X.
And you see it wrongly. Either you came late into this and could not be
bothered to check the archives or your attention span is so short that
you have forgotten already.
It all started when some Struts committers described their relatively closed
environment (limiting who could contribute) and Jonathan wondered
aloud whether that lack of openness had been a contributing factor to
Struts decline.
The question was never addressed because, in the inmortal words of one
of the defenders of the faith, "the question is invalid".
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
RE: [Sunday night 2a.m.] too much traffic
Posted by Albrecht Leiprecht <al...@t-online.de>.
cancel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
[Sunday night 2a.m.] too much traffic
Posted by Albrecht Leiprecht <al...@t-online.de>.
Up to now, I was a somewhat quiet reader of the list.
Is it still about Struts in here ? Looking at the last
300 posts make me wonder if it still is....
Thanks to all the ppl in here that have posted solutions
to struts programming challenges. You all have helped me a lot ...
Rgds
Albi
-----Original Message-----
From: Bart Busschots [mailto:bart@cs.nuim.ie]
Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2006 12:00 AM
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: The Mytical stagnation
> You are not in Kansas, Toto. You are on the Internet. And, aren't you
> Belgian?
Yup, your googling abilities are indeed great!
> I have, as I said, spent a great deal of time in Ireland and I
> don't recall that what you say is true.
Well, unless you've spent more than 22 years in Ireland you'll have to
take my word for it.
> I think it is false, in fact.
> However, I have no interest in being petty, so I will just call you Bart.
> You are not one of those calling Jonathan "Jon" are you?
I am, but he has not asked me not to. If he communicates his dislike at
being called Jon to me I will cease to do so.
BTW, if you are interested, the only people who ever called me
"Busschots" were my more old-fashioned school teachers and they didn't
use it as a term of endearment! The surest way to know you were in
trouble in my school was to be called by your surname only, particulary
if they put Mr. in front of it.
> Also, if that is
> insulting, why do you refer to your friend Niall Bren as "Bren"? Just a
> question. I am sure you have an answer.
>
>
Err .... what? I don't know of anyone called Niall Bren, I don't know
what bizarre info about my you think you've picked up on the interweb
but your sources seem to be somewhat wrong. Bren is short for Brendan
which is a first name.
I'm also a little bemused that you are going to so much trouble to try
get personal info on me. Either you are fortunate enough to be a lot
less busy than I am or else I have hit a real nerve.
Anyhow, this is now most certainly turning into spam so I will leave
this conversation before I start annoying the other poor people on this
list by filling their mailboxes with the same thing over and over and
over and over and over again. I hope others in this conversation will
follow suit.
Regards,
Bart.
>
>
> --
> "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
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie>.
> You are not in Kansas, Toto. You are on the Internet. And, aren't you
> Belgian?
Yup, your googling abilities are indeed great!
> I have, as I said, spent a great deal of time in Ireland and I
> don't recall that what you say is true.
Well, unless you've spent more than 22 years in Ireland you'll have to
take my word for it.
> I think it is false, in fact.
> However, I have no interest in being petty, so I will just call you Bart.
> You are not one of those calling Jonathan "Jon" are you?
I am, but he has not asked me not to. If he communicates his dislike at
being called Jon to me I will cease to do so.
BTW, if you are interested, the only people who ever called me
"Busschots" were my more old-fashioned school teachers and they didn't
use it as a term of endearment! The surest way to know you were in
trouble in my school was to be called by your surname only, particulary
if they put Mr. in front of it.
> Also, if that is
> insulting, why do you refer to your friend Niall Bren as "Bren"? Just a
> question. I am sure you have an answer.
>
>
Err .... what? I don't know of anyone called Niall Bren, I don't know
what bizarre info about my you think you've picked up on the interweb
but your sources seem to be somewhat wrong. Bren is short for Brendan
which is a first name.
I'm also a little bemused that you are going to so much trouble to try
get personal info on me. Either you are fortunate enough to be a lot
less busy than I am or else I have hit a real nerve.
Anyhow, this is now most certainly turning into spam so I will leave
this conversation before I start annoying the other poor people on this
list by filling their mailboxes with the same thing over and over and
over and over and over again. I hope others in this conversation will
follow suit.
Regards,
Bart.
>
>
> --
> "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: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
On 4/1/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
>
> Dakota Jack wrote:
>
> My questions are
> >based on a professional concern about the stability of a widely used
> >platform. It also has nothing to do with what you like or don't like.
>
<snip>
I let the first three weeks of your "discussion" go by without at peep.
</snip>
So what?
<snip>
> What I know for sure
> is that it is no longer a usefull discussion and is just pumping
> people's mail boxes full of crap.
</snip>
Of course it is a discussion. What else would it be? You mean you don't
like the discussion. Who cares?
<snip>
> That annoys me.
</snip>
Well, seek help. It is not my job in life to entertain or to assist you in
your difficulties with people.
<snip>
>
> >Are you, by the way, an exchange student in Ireland? I have spent a lot
> of
> >time in Ireland and have never run across a person with as little wit in
> >that fine land as you exhibit. Anyway, raise the level of thought to
> >something other than you and me and you will be a lot happier, even
> though
> >you are so happy now it is comforting to all, I am sure.
> >
> >
> And you call this not getting personal? Talk about hypocracy!
</snip>
No! I do call this getting personal. You came to this list on your own
admission with a personal matter. Well, you got some back. I find you so
lacking in personal insight as to be amazing. If you would like to talk
about the issues, fine! But when you jump into the middle of a
conversation, like so many others like you, and say that people should or
should not talk in tune with your agenda, I have to say that you are just
too much. If you don't like that, fine! I could care less. I would prefer
that you stick to the issues. But, if you think you have the authority to
measure what is and what is not worthwhile in discussion, you are
self-deluded.
<snip>
>>Now, I don't know if it is the case where you come from but referring to
> >>people by just their surname is insulting here in Ireland so kindly
> >>don't do it again.
</snip>
You are not in Kansas, Toto. You are on the Internet. And, aren't you
Belgian? I have, as I said, spent a great deal of time in Ireland and I
don't recall that what you say is true. I think it is false, in fact.
However, I have no interest in being petty, so I will just call you Bart.
You are not one of those calling Jonathan "Jon" are you? Also, if that is
insulting, why do you refer to your friend Niall Bren as "Bren"? Just a
question. I am sure you have an answer.
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~
Re: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie>.
Dakota Jack wrote:
>I don't have any personal issues in this discussion, other than finding the
>level of discussion an absolute embarrassment to mankind. My questions are
>based on a professional concern about the stability of a widely used
>platform. It also has nothing to do with what you like or don't like. I
>congratulate you on being so piss-happy you cannot stand it. I really could
>care less about your personal needs, your family, your girlfriends,
>whatever. Please leave the personal baloney at home where your
>acquaintances can deal with your peculiarities.
>
>
Please take your own advice.
I let the first three weeks of your "discussion" go by without at peep.
It is not no longer a discussion, it's certainly spam, most likely a
flame war and possibly even trolling at this stage. What I know for sure
is that it is no longer a usefull discussion and is just pumping
people's mail boxes full of crap. That annoys me. Hence I bowed into
this "discussion" this week, to express my annoyance at the abuse of
this list by your self and a few others.
>Are you, by the way, an exchange student in Ireland? I have spent a lot of
>time in Ireland and have never run across a person with as little wit in
>that fine land as you exhibit. Anyway, raise the level of thought to
>something other than you and me and you will be a lot happier, even though
>you are so happy now it is comforting to all, I am sure.
>
>
And you call this not getting personal? Talk about hypocracy!
You know I really can' take you seriously anymore. Your only answer to
anyone having a different opinion to you appears to be to belittle and
insult them. When I see peopel do that I always feel that it says very
little of the people being talked about but volumes about the speaker.
Regards,
Bart.
>On 4/1/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
>
>
>>Right Dakota, enough of your insulting childishness please.
>>
>>Like I have said before, there is more to choosing a technology than
>>just picking the most modern and cutting edge one. Like I have said
>>before, I don't CARE that Struts 1 is not the most up to date tech, I
>>care that it a) does what I needed it to do and b) that I was easily
>>able to start developing with it because there were lots of books and
>>online tutorials, more than for any other tech I was considering at the
>>time. What I am doing does not require the latest and greatest bleeding
>>edge stuff, but I needed readily available help to get started quickly.
>>Struts 1 gave me that so I am happy. I don't for one second regret
>>choosing Struts 1 and I don't feel I have been let down by the struts
>>development team.
>>
>>You obviously do feel let down but not everyone agrees with you and no
>>matter how much you shout and insult people that will not change. I am
>>fully aware of the realities of the situation I am in and about the
>>realities of the choice I made nine months ago, shouting at me will not
>>change that, it will just make me think of you as an even bigger idiot.
>>
>>Now, I don't know if it is the case where you come from but referring to
>>people by just their surname is insulting here in Ireland so kindly
>>don't do it again.
>>
>>Thank you,
>>
>>Bart.
>>
>>Dakota Jack wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>So you are ecstatic that your design choice of Struts 9 months ago has
>>>
>>>
>>been
>>
>>
>>>determined by the Struts committers to be a bad choice? You should fit
>>>right in around here with your logic. Webworks has not be "included",
>>>Busschots. Webworks, which was around when you made your BRILLIANT
>>>
>>>
>>choice,
>>
>>
>>>is now kicking your choice out the door.
>>>
>>>On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
>>>>guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than Struts
>>>>1.X. So the problem seems to be that two groups trying to achieve the
>>>>same thing have come together and merged. Hang on a sec .... that's NOT
>>>>a problem. The struts guys saw that webworks was good and adopted it.
>>>>GREAT, BRILLIANT! They are DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE USERS, i.e. US!
>>>>Just because you switch to a new track does NOT mean you have stagnated!
>>>>It means you are moving foward in a positive manner. How on earth can
>>>>that be a bad thing and how on earth can such obvious progress forward
>>>>be stagnation!
>>>>
>>>>By Jon's "logic" Windows development stagnated when the Windows ME
>>>>code-base was abandoned and MS have serious questions to answer as to
>>>>why they moved on to a better technology (WinNT Code Base). Not to
>>>>Mention Apple really stagnated when they moved from OS 9 to the NeXT
>>>>based OS X.
>>>>
>>>>Besides, since I started using struts about 9 months ago Struts have
>>>>moved on at least 5 minor versions, that's hardly stagnent now is it!
>>>>
>>>>Stuts is moving FORWARD, the struts code base has been STRENGTHENED by
>>>>the inclusion of WebWorks, where on earth is this mythical stagnation?
>>>>The only thing here that seems stagnent to me are John's posts. They are
>>>>just the same thing over and over and over and over and over .........
>>>>again. We get it Jon, we know what you think, it's just that not
>>>>everyone agrees with you and no matter how many times you say the same
>>>>thing everyone will NEVER agree with you!
>>>>
>>>>This topic is dead, it has been for weeks, can we now please do the
>>>>honourable thing and bury it!
>>>>
>>>>Bart.
>>>>
>>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>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~
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
I don't have any personal issues in this discussion, other than finding the
level of discussion an absolute embarrassment to mankind. My questions are
based on a professional concern about the stability of a widely used
platform. It also has nothing to do with what you like or don't like. I
congratulate you on being so piss-happy you cannot stand it. I really could
care less about your personal needs, your family, your girlfriends,
whatever. Please leave the personal baloney at home where your
acquaintances can deal with your peculiarities.
Are you, by the way, an exchange student in Ireland? I have spent a lot of
time in Ireland and have never run across a person with as little wit in
that fine land as you exhibit. Anyway, raise the level of thought to
something other than you and me and you will be a lot happier, even though
you are so happy now it is comforting to all, I am sure.
On 4/1/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
>
> Right Dakota, enough of your insulting childishness please.
>
> Like I have said before, there is more to choosing a technology than
> just picking the most modern and cutting edge one. Like I have said
> before, I don't CARE that Struts 1 is not the most up to date tech, I
> care that it a) does what I needed it to do and b) that I was easily
> able to start developing with it because there were lots of books and
> online tutorials, more than for any other tech I was considering at the
> time. What I am doing does not require the latest and greatest bleeding
> edge stuff, but I needed readily available help to get started quickly.
> Struts 1 gave me that so I am happy. I don't for one second regret
> choosing Struts 1 and I don't feel I have been let down by the struts
> development team.
>
> You obviously do feel let down but not everyone agrees with you and no
> matter how much you shout and insult people that will not change. I am
> fully aware of the realities of the situation I am in and about the
> realities of the choice I made nine months ago, shouting at me will not
> change that, it will just make me think of you as an even bigger idiot.
>
> Now, I don't know if it is the case where you come from but referring to
> people by just their surname is insulting here in Ireland so kindly
> don't do it again.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Bart.
>
> Dakota Jack wrote:
>
> >So you are ecstatic that your design choice of Struts 9 months ago has
> been
> >determined by the Struts committers to be a bad choice? You should fit
> >right in around here with your logic. Webworks has not be "included",
> >Busschots. Webworks, which was around when you made your BRILLIANT
> choice,
> >is now kicking your choice out the door.
> >
> >On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
> >>guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than Struts
> >>1.X. So the problem seems to be that two groups trying to achieve the
> >>same thing have come together and merged. Hang on a sec .... that's NOT
> >>a problem. The struts guys saw that webworks was good and adopted it.
> >>GREAT, BRILLIANT! They are DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE USERS, i.e. US!
> >>Just because you switch to a new track does NOT mean you have stagnated!
> >>It means you are moving foward in a positive manner. How on earth can
> >>that be a bad thing and how on earth can such obvious progress forward
> >>be stagnation!
> >>
> >>By Jon's "logic" Windows development stagnated when the Windows ME
> >>code-base was abandoned and MS have serious questions to answer as to
> >>why they moved on to a better technology (WinNT Code Base). Not to
> >>Mention Apple really stagnated when they moved from OS 9 to the NeXT
> >>based OS X.
> >>
> >>Besides, since I started using struts about 9 months ago Struts have
> >>moved on at least 5 minor versions, that's hardly stagnent now is it!
> >>
> >>Stuts is moving FORWARD, the struts code base has been STRENGTHENED by
> >>the inclusion of WebWorks, where on earth is this mythical stagnation?
> >>The only thing here that seems stagnent to me are John's posts. They are
> >>just the same thing over and over and over and over and over .........
> >>again. We get it Jon, we know what you think, it's just that not
> >>everyone agrees with you and no matter how many times you say the same
> >>thing everyone will NEVER agree with you!
> >>
> >>This topic is dead, it has been for weeks, can we now please do the
> >>honourable thing and bury it!
> >>
> >>Bart.
> >>
> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>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: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie>.
Right Dakota, enough of your insulting childishness please.
Like I have said before, there is more to choosing a technology than
just picking the most modern and cutting edge one. Like I have said
before, I don't CARE that Struts 1 is not the most up to date tech, I
care that it a) does what I needed it to do and b) that I was easily
able to start developing with it because there were lots of books and
online tutorials, more than for any other tech I was considering at the
time. What I am doing does not require the latest and greatest bleeding
edge stuff, but I needed readily available help to get started quickly.
Struts 1 gave me that so I am happy. I don't for one second regret
choosing Struts 1 and I don't feel I have been let down by the struts
development team.
You obviously do feel let down but not everyone agrees with you and no
matter how much you shout and insult people that will not change. I am
fully aware of the realities of the situation I am in and about the
realities of the choice I made nine months ago, shouting at me will not
change that, it will just make me think of you as an even bigger idiot.
Now, I don't know if it is the case where you come from but referring to
people by just their surname is insulting here in Ireland so kindly
don't do it again.
Thank you,
Bart.
Dakota Jack wrote:
>So you are ecstatic that your design choice of Struts 9 months ago has been
>determined by the Struts committers to be a bad choice? You should fit
>right in around here with your logic. Webworks has not be "included",
>Busschots. Webworks, which was around when you made your BRILLIANT choice,
>is now kicking your choice out the door.
>
>On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
>
>
>>Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
>>guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than Struts
>>1.X. So the problem seems to be that two groups trying to achieve the
>>same thing have come together and merged. Hang on a sec .... that's NOT
>>a problem. The struts guys saw that webworks was good and adopted it.
>>GREAT, BRILLIANT! They are DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE USERS, i.e. US!
>>Just because you switch to a new track does NOT mean you have stagnated!
>>It means you are moving foward in a positive manner. How on earth can
>>that be a bad thing and how on earth can such obvious progress forward
>>be stagnation!
>>
>>By Jon's "logic" Windows development stagnated when the Windows ME
>>code-base was abandoned and MS have serious questions to answer as to
>>why they moved on to a better technology (WinNT Code Base). Not to
>>Mention Apple really stagnated when they moved from OS 9 to the NeXT
>>based OS X.
>>
>>Besides, since I started using struts about 9 months ago Struts have
>>moved on at least 5 minor versions, that's hardly stagnent now is it!
>>
>>Stuts is moving FORWARD, the struts code base has been STRENGTHENED by
>>the inclusion of WebWorks, where on earth is this mythical stagnation?
>>The only thing here that seems stagnent to me are John's posts. They are
>>just the same thing over and over and over and over and over .........
>>again. We get it Jon, we know what you think, it's just that not
>>everyone agrees with you and no matter how many times you say the same
>>thing everyone will NEVER agree with you!
>>
>>This topic is dead, it has been for weeks, can we now please do the
>>honourable thing and bury it!
>>
>>Bart.
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>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: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
So you are ecstatic that your design choice of Struts 9 months ago has been
determined by the Struts committers to be a bad choice? You should fit
right in around here with your logic. Webworks has not be "included",
Busschots. Webworks, which was around when you made your BRILLIANT choice,
is now kicking your choice out the door.
On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
>
> Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
> guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than Struts
> 1.X. So the problem seems to be that two groups trying to achieve the
> same thing have come together and merged. Hang on a sec .... that's NOT
> a problem. The struts guys saw that webworks was good and adopted it.
> GREAT, BRILLIANT! They are DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE USERS, i.e. US!
> Just because you switch to a new track does NOT mean you have stagnated!
> It means you are moving foward in a positive manner. How on earth can
> that be a bad thing and how on earth can such obvious progress forward
> be stagnation!
>
> By Jon's "logic" Windows development stagnated when the Windows ME
> code-base was abandoned and MS have serious questions to answer as to
> why they moved on to a better technology (WinNT Code Base). Not to
> Mention Apple really stagnated when they moved from OS 9 to the NeXT
> based OS X.
>
> Besides, since I started using struts about 9 months ago Struts have
> moved on at least 5 minor versions, that's hardly stagnent now is it!
>
> Stuts is moving FORWARD, the struts code base has been STRENGTHENED by
> the inclusion of WebWorks, where on earth is this mythical stagnation?
> The only thing here that seems stagnent to me are John's posts. They are
> just the same thing over and over and over and over and over .........
> again. We get it Jon, we know what you think, it's just that not
> everyone agrees with you and no matter how many times you say the same
> thing everyone will NEVER agree with you!
>
> This topic is dead, it has been for weeks, can we now please do the
> honourable thing and bury it!
>
> Bart.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Dave Newton <ne...@pingsite.com>.
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
> [...] and I will not argue with you.
Oh ha ha, another Jonathon Revusky impersonator. But you slipped up
here, didn't you!
Dave
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Al Eridani <al...@gmail.com>.
On 3/30/06, Konstantin Priblouda <kp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> but now there is serious demand (in germany).
Not in the San Francisco Bay Area; in craigslist, Struts: 80, WebWork: 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <re...@wanadoo.es>.
Konstantin Priblouda wrote:
>
> --- Jonathan Revusky <re...@wanadoo.es> wrote:
>
>
>>Since I don't see that, I have to conclude that most
>>people don't grok
>>what is going on, or at least the full implications.
>>If one does
>>understand the full implications, one ought to be
>>quite wary about
>>continuing to invest in building things on top of
>>Struts 1.x and one
>>would be looking at migrating one's apps and one's
>>skills towards what
>>will be the 2.x code -- i.e. Webwork.
>>
>
>
> I think some of users already recognized what is going
> on. It was almost impossible to sell webwork skills (
> as freelancer ) , because everybody wanted struts -
> but now there is serious demand (in germany). I get
> 2-3
> serious requests per week. Not only development, but
> also workshops / teaching.
That's interesting to hear.
OTOH, it is hard to know how much of the pick-up you are reporting is
due to people being aware that Webwork is going to be Struts Action 2.
Webwork might have just been picking up steam independently of that.
I've been surprised in this mailing list how little awareness there
seems to be. After all, most users don't subscribe to mailing lists, so
this is the subset that is more interested in being up-to-date on stuff.
Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>
> regards,
>
> ----[ Konstantin Pribluda http://www.pribluda.de ]----------------
> Still using XDoclet 1.x? XDoclet 2 is released and of production quality.
> check it out: http://xdoclet.codehaus.org
>
> __________________________________________________
> 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: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Konstantin Priblouda <kp...@yahoo.com>.
--- Jonathan Revusky <re...@wanadoo.es> wrote:
> Since I don't see that, I have to conclude that most
> people don't grok
> what is going on, or at least the full implications.
> If one does
> understand the full implications, one ought to be
> quite wary about
> continuing to invest in building things on top of
> Struts 1.x and one
> would be looking at migrating one's apps and one's
> skills towards what
> will be the 2.x code -- i.e. Webwork.
>
I think some of users already recognized what is going
on. It was almost impossible to sell webwork skills (
as freelancer ) , because everybody wanted struts -
but now there is serious demand (in germany). I get
2-3
serious requests per week. Not only development, but
also workshops / teaching.
regards,
----[ Konstantin Pribluda http://www.pribluda.de ]----------------
Still using XDoclet 1.x? XDoclet 2 is released and of production quality.
check it out: http://xdoclet.codehaus.org
__________________________________________________
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: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <re...@wanadoo.es>.
Vinny wrote:
> Jon, I think most of use were well aware of the merger.
> See : http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=113321040221316&w=2
>
> We've hashed over this before you showed up:
> and this : http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=113348813300002&r=1&w=2
>
> You might want search our archive a bit.
I'm not saying it was never discussed at all.
However, if the mass of users here really understood what was going on
and its implications, you would expect to see a lot more threads here
related to code migration issues.
Since I don't see that, I have to conclude that most people don't grok
what is going on, or at least the full implications. If one does
understand the full implications, one ought to be quite wary about
continuing to invest in building things on top of Struts 1.x and one
would be looking at migrating one's apps and one's skills towards what
will be the 2.x code -- i.e. Webwork.
Actually, Bart Busschots did just state that, before this discussion, he
did not have a clear idea of what was going on. That's only one guy,
okay, but I seriously doubt that he is exceptional in this regard.
Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Vinny <xa...@gmail.com>.
Jon, I think most of use were well aware of the merger.
See : http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=113321040221316&w=2
We've hashed over this before you showed up:
and this : http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=113348813300002&r=1&w=2
You might want search our archive a bit.
> >>
> >> Anyway, I have one question that intrigues me. Did you understand what
> >> was going on with this before today?
> >>
> >> I mean, this has been in the works for over 3 months, I think.
> >>
> >>> So the problem seems to be that two groups trying to achieve the same
> >>> thing have come together and merged. Hang on a sec .... that's NOT a
> >>> problem. The struts guys saw that webworks was good and adopted it.
> >>> GREAT, BRILLIANT! They are DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE USERS, i.e. US!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Well, Bart, Webwork has been there for years, available for guys like
> >> you to use. The Struts guys didn't do the work to make that technology
> >> come about. That was done by the Webwork guys of course.
> >>
> >> They're not making anything available to you that wasn't already
> >> available. So, all this stuff about BRILLIANT, shouting this in all
> >> caps, seems a tad over the top to me...
> >>
> >> The only thing that's going on is that Struts 1.x fell way behind
> >> being the state of the art. Due to its visibility/projection
> >> non-technical assets, it was able to attract new users, like you -- as
> >> recently as 9 months ago, despite being technically obsolete.
> >>
> >> Now you've made an investment, building applications on top of Struts
> >> 1.x and it's brilliant that they move to the Webwork codebase
> >> (relabelling that as Struts Action 2.)
> >>
> >> BUT.... you could have simply avoided all the bother -- if you knew
> >> what was going on -- by using Webwork in the first place!
> >>
> >>
> >>> Just because you switch to a new track does NOT mean you have
> >>> stagnated! It means you are moving foward in a positive manner. How
> >>> on earth can that be a bad thing and how on earth can such obvious
> >>> progress forward be stagnation!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Well, there are various issues here. You have the fact that the
> >> innovative work was done elsewhere, yet the community that, somehow,
> >> despite its built-in advantages, was not able to innovate, swallows
> >> the community that did the innovative work, and imposes their culture
> >> and project management practices on them. This is, in general, a kind
> >> of problem IMO.
> >>
> >> This discussion originated in the context of discussing open source
> >> project management. Various Struts/ASF bigwigs were being -- at least
> >> AFAICS -- quite arrogant about the so-called "Apache Way" being the
> >> last word in how everything has to be done.
> >>
> >> This ultimately got me questioning openly how on earth they can say
> >> this. In this Struts/Webwork merger, you have a tacit acceptance of
> >> the fact that the developer community that was presumably doing things
> >> according to the "Apache Way" (I mean Struts here) did not innovate,
> >> and ended up having to bring in a codebase not developed at ASF
> >> (Webwork) in order to have something reasonably up-to-date to offer.
> >>
> >> Yet you will still hear this people saying: "The Apache Way" is X and
> >> pointing you to pages about this like they were scripture.
> >>
> >> So, my pressing them about the Struts 1.x codebase and that it
> >> stagnated occurred in that context.
> >>
> >> You really have to understand the context in which conversations
> >> developed.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> By Jon's "logic" Windows development stagnated when the Windows ME
> >>> code-base was abandoned and MS have serious questions to answer as to
> >>> why they moved on to a better technology (WinNT Code Base). Not to
> >>> Mention Apple really stagnated when they moved from OS 9 to the NeXT
> >>> based OS X.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Well, in both cases, there was a clear migration path offered to users
> >> and I think there was far more clarity about what was going on.
> >>
> >> Correct me if I'm wrong, but before I brought this up, you didn't
> >> really understand what was going on with this. So, at the very least,
> >> the communication with users has been terrible.
> >>
> >> In any case, I am not "whining" that the superior technology (Webwork
> >> in this case) is going to replace the inferior technology (Struts 1.x).
> >>
> >> That's not exactly my point. In terms of the overall open source
> >> ecology, I have some real misgivings about a team that failed to
> >> innovate imposing its culture and project management practices on the
> >> community that really was able to innovate and be at the cutting edge.
> >> This is problematic.
> >>
> >> Again, you have to understand the context of the discussion.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Besides, since I started using struts about 9 months ago Struts have
> >>> moved on at least 5 minor versions, that's hardly stagnent now is it!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Well, consider this. Step back and look at it: you could simply have
> >> been using Struts 2.x for the last 9 months by using Webwork instead.
> >>
> >> So I think there's reason to look askance at what a great favor these
> >> Struts guys have done for you. You've been using technology for the
> >> last 9 months that the Struts developers themselves consider to be
> >> inferior.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Stuts is moving FORWARD, the struts code base has been STRENGTHENED
> >>> by the inclusion of WebWorks,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> It's not an inclusion, Bart. The Webwork codebase is simply replacing
> >> the Struts 1.x codebase that you have been building your stuff on top of.
> >>
> >>> where on earth is this mythical stagnation? The only thing here that
> >>> seems stagnent to me are John's posts. They are just the same thing
> >>> over and over and over and over and over ......... again. We get it
> >>> Jon, we know what you think, it's just that not everyone agrees with
> >>> you and no matter how many times you say the same thing everyone will
> >>> NEVER agree with you!
> >>>
> >>> This topic is dead, it has been for weeks, can we now please do the
> >>> honourable thing and bury it!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> The topic has been avoided basically. In any case, if you still think
> >> this topic is not worth talking about and other think it, why do you
> >> care if they talk about it?
> >>
> >> Jonathan Revusky
> >> --
> >> lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Bart.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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
>
>
--
Ghetto Java: http://www.ghettojava.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <re...@wanadoo.es>.
Bart Busschots wrote:
> To answer your question, not in any detail no. I just knew struts was
> incorporatng another project.
Okay, thank you for sharing that.
> I didn't care about the details then and I
> still don't now.
That's odd. For a guy who is this apathetic about the whole thing, you
seemed kind of passionate just now.
Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>
> Jonathan Revusky wrote:
>
>> Bart Busschots wrote:
>>
>>> OK, I'm keeping this short:
>>>
>>> 1) No one put a gun to the WebWorks guys and made them become part of
>>> struts, they chose that
>>
>>
>>
>> True, though I never claimed that a gun was put to anybody's head.
>>
>>> 2) The struts team now contains the WebWorks guys right? So there is
>>> no division, they are the one team.
>>
>>
>>
>> This is true. However, they have not really worked as a team before.
>> We do not know what the result will be.
>>
>>
>>> 3) The reason I choose struts is because struts does things the
>>> Apache way. I have great faith in the Apache way and that is not
>>> un-founded faith, just look at the Apache Web server!
>>
>>
>>
>> It is my considered view that your faith in the "Apache Way" is
>> misguided. Especially if it is based on the In particular, the Apache
>> web server, written in C, has nothing to do with something like Struts.
>>
>>
>>> 4) Being at the bleeding edge is not always a good thing. Stuts does
>>> what it does well. I am very happy with the 1.X framework, it has
>>> worked well for me and massively simplified a complex task. There may
>>> be something more cutting edge out there but that does not make it
>>> better to use. Support and availability of experts are often more
>>> important factors and Struts has more to offer in that field than
>>> WebWorks did.
>>
>>
>>
>> If you are happy and think you made the right decision, that is
>> wonderful and I will not argue with you.
>>
>>
>>> 5) The merger/takeover is great for both Struts and WebWorks. Struts
>>> gets the advangages of WebWorks code and WebWorks gets the advantage
>>> of all the non-code stuff that Struts have obviously gotten right.
>>> They have a great brand that is recognised!
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, this reflects the official reasoning behind it.
>>
>>> 6) I don't care about the personalities involved. As long as Struts
>>> works all is well. I will judge the new merged Struts team by the
>>> code they produce from here forward, not what half the team did or
>>> did not do in the past. Time will tell, just let them get on with the
>>> task at hand and let us all get on with our tasks ... building Web Apps!
>>
>>
>>
>> That is not unreasonable either. Peace and good will to all men.
>>
>> One question, Bart. You didn't answer me before on this. Before today,
>> did you understand what was going on with this Struts/Webwork stuff? I
>> am curious about this.
>>
>> Jonathan Revusky
>> --
>> lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>>
>>>
>>> Bart.
>>>
>>> Jonathan Revusky wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bart Busschots wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the
>>>>> struts guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather
>>>>> than Struts 1.X.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm not precisely whining about that.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, I have one question that intrigues me. Did you understand
>>>> what was going on with this before today?
>>>>
>>>> I mean, this has been in the works for over 3 months, I think.
>>>>
>>>>> So the problem seems to be that two groups trying to achieve the
>>>>> same thing have come together and merged. Hang on a sec .... that's
>>>>> NOT a problem. The struts guys saw that webworks was good and
>>>>> adopted it. GREAT, BRILLIANT! They are DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE
>>>>> USERS, i.e. US!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, Bart, Webwork has been there for years, available for guys
>>>> like you to use. The Struts guys didn't do the work to make that
>>>> technology come about. That was done by the Webwork guys of course.
>>>>
>>>> They're not making anything available to you that wasn't already
>>>> available. So, all this stuff about BRILLIANT, shouting this in all
>>>> caps, seems a tad over the top to me...
>>>>
>>>> The only thing that's going on is that Struts 1.x fell way behind
>>>> being the state of the art. Due to its visibility/projection
>>>> non-technical assets, it was able to attract new users, like you --
>>>> as recently as 9 months ago, despite being technically obsolete.
>>>>
>>>> Now you've made an investment, building applications on top of
>>>> Struts 1.x and it's brilliant that they move to the Webwork codebase
>>>> (relabelling that as Struts Action 2.)
>>>>
>>>> BUT.... you could have simply avoided all the bother -- if you knew
>>>> what was going on -- by using Webwork in the first place!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Just because you switch to a new track does NOT mean you have
>>>>> stagnated! It means you are moving foward in a positive manner. How
>>>>> on earth can that be a bad thing and how on earth can such obvious
>>>>> progress forward be stagnation!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, there are various issues here. You have the fact that the
>>>> innovative work was done elsewhere, yet the community that, somehow,
>>>> despite its built-in advantages, was not able to innovate, swallows
>>>> the community that did the innovative work, and imposes their
>>>> culture and project management practices on them. This is, in
>>>> general, a kind of problem IMO.
>>>>
>>>> This discussion originated in the context of discussing open source
>>>> project management. Various Struts/ASF bigwigs were being -- at
>>>> least AFAICS -- quite arrogant about the so-called "Apache Way"
>>>> being the last word in how everything has to be done.
>>>>
>>>> This ultimately got me questioning openly how on earth they can say
>>>> this. In this Struts/Webwork merger, you have a tacit acceptance of
>>>> the fact that the developer community that was presumably doing
>>>> things according to the "Apache Way" (I mean Struts here) did not
>>>> innovate, and ended up having to bring in a codebase not developed
>>>> at ASF (Webwork) in order to have something reasonably up-to-date to
>>>> offer.
>>>>
>>>> Yet you will still hear this people saying: "The Apache Way" is X
>>>> and pointing you to pages about this like they were scripture.
>>>>
>>>> So, my pressing them about the Struts 1.x codebase and that it
>>>> stagnated occurred in that context.
>>>>
>>>> You really have to understand the context in which conversations
>>>> developed.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> By Jon's "logic" Windows development stagnated when the Windows ME
>>>>> code-base was abandoned and MS have serious questions to answer as
>>>>> to why they moved on to a better technology (WinNT Code Base). Not
>>>>> to Mention Apple really stagnated when they moved from OS 9 to the
>>>>> NeXT based OS X.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, in both cases, there was a clear migration path offered to
>>>> users and I think there was far more clarity about what was going on.
>>>>
>>>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but before I brought this up, you didn't
>>>> really understand what was going on with this. So, at the very
>>>> least, the communication with users has been terrible.
>>>>
>>>> In any case, I am not "whining" that the superior technology
>>>> (Webwork in this case) is going to replace the inferior technology
>>>> (Struts 1.x).
>>>>
>>>> That's not exactly my point. In terms of the overall open source
>>>> ecology, I have some real misgivings about a team that failed to
>>>> innovate imposing its culture and project management practices on
>>>> the community that really was able to innovate and be at the cutting
>>>> edge. This is problematic.
>>>>
>>>> Again, you have to understand the context of the discussion.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Besides, since I started using struts about 9 months ago Struts
>>>>> have moved on at least 5 minor versions, that's hardly stagnent now
>>>>> is it!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, consider this. Step back and look at it: you could simply have
>>>> been using Struts 2.x for the last 9 months by using Webwork instead.
>>>>
>>>> So I think there's reason to look askance at what a great favor
>>>> these Struts guys have done for you. You've been using technology
>>>> for the last 9 months that the Struts developers themselves consider
>>>> to be inferior.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Stuts is moving FORWARD, the struts code base has been STRENGTHENED
>>>>> by the inclusion of WebWorks,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's not an inclusion, Bart. The Webwork codebase is simply
>>>> replacing the Struts 1.x codebase that you have been building your
>>>> stuff on top of.
>>>>
>>>>> where on earth is this mythical stagnation? The only thing here
>>>>> that seems stagnent to me are John's posts. They are just the same
>>>>> thing over and over and over and over and over ......... again. We
>>>>> get it Jon, we know what you think, it's just that not everyone
>>>>> agrees with you and no matter how many times you say the same thing
>>>>> everyone will NEVER agree with you!
>>>>>
>>>>> This topic is dead, it has been for weeks, can we now please do the
>>>>> honourable thing and bury it!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The topic has been avoided basically. In any case, if you still
>>>> think this topic is not worth talking about and other think it, why
>>>> do you care if they talk about it?
>>>>
>>>> Jonathan Revusky
>>>> --
>>>> lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bart.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie>.
To answer your question, not in any detail no. I just knew struts was
incorporatng another project. I didn't care about the details then and I
still don't now.
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
> Bart Busschots wrote:
>
>> OK, I'm keeping this short:
>>
>> 1) No one put a gun to the WebWorks guys and made them become part of
>> struts, they chose that
>
>
> True, though I never claimed that a gun was put to anybody's head.
>
>> 2) The struts team now contains the WebWorks guys right? So there is
>> no division, they are the one team.
>
>
> This is true. However, they have not really worked as a team before.
> We do not know what the result will be.
>
>
>> 3) The reason I choose struts is because struts does things the
>> Apache way. I have great faith in the Apache way and that is not
>> un-founded faith, just look at the Apache Web server!
>
>
> It is my considered view that your faith in the "Apache Way" is
> misguided. Especially if it is based on the In particular, the Apache
> web server, written in C, has nothing to do with something like Struts.
>
>
>> 4) Being at the bleeding edge is not always a good thing. Stuts does
>> what it does well. I am very happy with the 1.X framework, it has
>> worked well for me and massively simplified a complex task. There may
>> be something more cutting edge out there but that does not make it
>> better to use. Support and availability of experts are often more
>> important factors and Struts has more to offer in that field than
>> WebWorks did.
>
>
> If you are happy and think you made the right decision, that is
> wonderful and I will not argue with you.
>
>
>> 5) The merger/takeover is great for both Struts and WebWorks. Struts
>> gets the advangages of WebWorks code and WebWorks gets the advantage
>> of all the non-code stuff that Struts have obviously gotten right.
>> They have a great brand that is recognised!
>
>
> Yes, this reflects the official reasoning behind it.
>
>> 6) I don't care about the personalities involved. As long as Struts
>> works all is well. I will judge the new merged Struts team by the
>> code they produce from here forward, not what half the team did or
>> did not do in the past. Time will tell, just let them get on with the
>> task at hand and let us all get on with our tasks ... building Web Apps!
>
>
> That is not unreasonable either. Peace and good will to all men.
>
> One question, Bart. You didn't answer me before on this. Before today,
> did you understand what was going on with this Struts/Webwork stuff? I
> am curious about this.
>
> Jonathan Revusky
> --
> lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>
>>
>> Bart.
>>
>> Jonathan Revusky wrote:
>>
>>> Bart Busschots wrote:
>>>
>>>> Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the
>>>> struts guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather
>>>> than Struts 1.X.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not precisely whining about that.
>>>
>>> Anyway, I have one question that intrigues me. Did you understand
>>> what was going on with this before today?
>>>
>>> I mean, this has been in the works for over 3 months, I think.
>>>
>>>> So the problem seems to be that two groups trying to achieve the
>>>> same thing have come together and merged. Hang on a sec .... that's
>>>> NOT a problem. The struts guys saw that webworks was good and
>>>> adopted it. GREAT, BRILLIANT! They are DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE
>>>> USERS, i.e. US!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, Bart, Webwork has been there for years, available for guys
>>> like you to use. The Struts guys didn't do the work to make that
>>> technology come about. That was done by the Webwork guys of course.
>>>
>>> They're not making anything available to you that wasn't already
>>> available. So, all this stuff about BRILLIANT, shouting this in all
>>> caps, seems a tad over the top to me...
>>>
>>> The only thing that's going on is that Struts 1.x fell way behind
>>> being the state of the art. Due to its visibility/projection
>>> non-technical assets, it was able to attract new users, like you --
>>> as recently as 9 months ago, despite being technically obsolete.
>>>
>>> Now you've made an investment, building applications on top of
>>> Struts 1.x and it's brilliant that they move to the Webwork codebase
>>> (relabelling that as Struts Action 2.)
>>>
>>> BUT.... you could have simply avoided all the bother -- if you knew
>>> what was going on -- by using Webwork in the first place!
>>>
>>>
>>>> Just because you switch to a new track does NOT mean you have
>>>> stagnated! It means you are moving foward in a positive manner. How
>>>> on earth can that be a bad thing and how on earth can such obvious
>>>> progress forward be stagnation!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, there are various issues here. You have the fact that the
>>> innovative work was done elsewhere, yet the community that, somehow,
>>> despite its built-in advantages, was not able to innovate, swallows
>>> the community that did the innovative work, and imposes their
>>> culture and project management practices on them. This is, in
>>> general, a kind of problem IMO.
>>>
>>> This discussion originated in the context of discussing open source
>>> project management. Various Struts/ASF bigwigs were being -- at
>>> least AFAICS -- quite arrogant about the so-called "Apache Way"
>>> being the last word in how everything has to be done.
>>>
>>> This ultimately got me questioning openly how on earth they can say
>>> this. In this Struts/Webwork merger, you have a tacit acceptance of
>>> the fact that the developer community that was presumably doing
>>> things according to the "Apache Way" (I mean Struts here) did not
>>> innovate, and ended up having to bring in a codebase not developed
>>> at ASF (Webwork) in order to have something reasonably up-to-date to
>>> offer.
>>>
>>> Yet you will still hear this people saying: "The Apache Way" is X
>>> and pointing you to pages about this like they were scripture.
>>>
>>> So, my pressing them about the Struts 1.x codebase and that it
>>> stagnated occurred in that context.
>>>
>>> You really have to understand the context in which conversations
>>> developed.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> By Jon's "logic" Windows development stagnated when the Windows ME
>>>> code-base was abandoned and MS have serious questions to answer as
>>>> to why they moved on to a better technology (WinNT Code Base). Not
>>>> to Mention Apple really stagnated when they moved from OS 9 to the
>>>> NeXT based OS X.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, in both cases, there was a clear migration path offered to
>>> users and I think there was far more clarity about what was going on.
>>>
>>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but before I brought this up, you didn't
>>> really understand what was going on with this. So, at the very
>>> least, the communication with users has been terrible.
>>>
>>> In any case, I am not "whining" that the superior technology
>>> (Webwork in this case) is going to replace the inferior technology
>>> (Struts 1.x).
>>>
>>> That's not exactly my point. In terms of the overall open source
>>> ecology, I have some real misgivings about a team that failed to
>>> innovate imposing its culture and project management practices on
>>> the community that really was able to innovate and be at the cutting
>>> edge. This is problematic.
>>>
>>> Again, you have to understand the context of the discussion.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Besides, since I started using struts about 9 months ago Struts
>>>> have moved on at least 5 minor versions, that's hardly stagnent now
>>>> is it!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, consider this. Step back and look at it: you could simply have
>>> been using Struts 2.x for the last 9 months by using Webwork instead.
>>>
>>> So I think there's reason to look askance at what a great favor
>>> these Struts guys have done for you. You've been using technology
>>> for the last 9 months that the Struts developers themselves consider
>>> to be inferior.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Stuts is moving FORWARD, the struts code base has been STRENGTHENED
>>>> by the inclusion of WebWorks,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It's not an inclusion, Bart. The Webwork codebase is simply
>>> replacing the Struts 1.x codebase that you have been building your
>>> stuff on top of.
>>>
>>>> where on earth is this mythical stagnation? The only thing here
>>>> that seems stagnent to me are John's posts. They are just the same
>>>> thing over and over and over and over and over ......... again. We
>>>> get it Jon, we know what you think, it's just that not everyone
>>>> agrees with you and no matter how many times you say the same thing
>>>> everyone will NEVER agree with you!
>>>>
>>>> This topic is dead, it has been for weeks, can we now please do the
>>>> honourable thing and bury it!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The topic has been avoided basically. In any case, if you still
>>> think this topic is not worth talking about and other think it, why
>>> do you care if they talk about it?
>>>
>>> Jonathan Revusky
>>> --
>>> lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bart.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <re...@wanadoo.es>.
Bart Busschots wrote:
> OK, I'm keeping this short:
>
> 1) No one put a gun to the WebWorks guys and made them become part of
> struts, they chose that
True, though I never claimed that a gun was put to anybody's head.
> 2) The struts team now contains the WebWorks guys right? So there is no
> division, they are the one team.
This is true. However, they have not really worked as a team before. We
do not know what the result will be.
> 3) The reason I choose struts is because struts does things the Apache
> way. I have great faith in the Apache way and that is not un-founded
> faith, just look at the Apache Web server!
It is my considered view that your faith in the "Apache Way" is
misguided. Especially if it is based on the In particular, the Apache
web server, written in C, has nothing to do with something like Struts.
> 4) Being at the bleeding edge is not always a good thing. Stuts does
> what it does well. I am very happy with the 1.X framework, it has worked
> well for me and massively simplified a complex task. There may be
> something more cutting edge out there but that does not make it better
> to use. Support and availability of experts are often more important
> factors and Struts has more to offer in that field than WebWorks did.
If you are happy and think you made the right decision, that is
wonderful and I will not argue with you.
> 5) The merger/takeover is great for both Struts and WebWorks. Struts
> gets the advangages of WebWorks code and WebWorks gets the advantage of
> all the non-code stuff that Struts have obviously gotten right. They
> have a great brand that is recognised!
Yes, this reflects the official reasoning behind it.
> 6) I don't care about the personalities involved. As long as Struts
> works all is well. I will judge the new merged Struts team by the code
> they produce from here forward, not what half the team did or did not do
> in the past. Time will tell, just let them get on with the task at hand
> and let us all get on with our tasks ... building Web Apps!
That is not unreasonable either. Peace and good will to all men.
One question, Bart. You didn't answer me before on this. Before today,
did you understand what was going on with this Struts/Webwork stuff? I
am curious about this.
Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>
> Bart.
>
> Jonathan Revusky wrote:
>
>> Bart Busschots wrote:
>>
>>> Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the
>>> struts guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather
>>> than Struts 1.X.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm not precisely whining about that.
>>
>> Anyway, I have one question that intrigues me. Did you understand what
>> was going on with this before today?
>>
>> I mean, this has been in the works for over 3 months, I think.
>>
>>> So the problem seems to be that two groups trying to achieve the same
>>> thing have come together and merged. Hang on a sec .... that's NOT a
>>> problem. The struts guys saw that webworks was good and adopted it.
>>> GREAT, BRILLIANT! They are DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE USERS, i.e. US!
>>
>>
>>
>> Well, Bart, Webwork has been there for years, available for guys like
>> you to use. The Struts guys didn't do the work to make that technology
>> come about. That was done by the Webwork guys of course.
>>
>> They're not making anything available to you that wasn't already
>> available. So, all this stuff about BRILLIANT, shouting this in all
>> caps, seems a tad over the top to me...
>>
>> The only thing that's going on is that Struts 1.x fell way behind
>> being the state of the art. Due to its visibility/projection
>> non-technical assets, it was able to attract new users, like you -- as
>> recently as 9 months ago, despite being technically obsolete.
>>
>> Now you've made an investment, building applications on top of Struts
>> 1.x and it's brilliant that they move to the Webwork codebase
>> (relabelling that as Struts Action 2.)
>>
>> BUT.... you could have simply avoided all the bother -- if you knew
>> what was going on -- by using Webwork in the first place!
>>
>>
>>> Just because you switch to a new track does NOT mean you have
>>> stagnated! It means you are moving foward in a positive manner. How
>>> on earth can that be a bad thing and how on earth can such obvious
>>> progress forward be stagnation!
>>
>>
>>
>> Well, there are various issues here. You have the fact that the
>> innovative work was done elsewhere, yet the community that, somehow,
>> despite its built-in advantages, was not able to innovate, swallows
>> the community that did the innovative work, and imposes their culture
>> and project management practices on them. This is, in general, a kind
>> of problem IMO.
>>
>> This discussion originated in the context of discussing open source
>> project management. Various Struts/ASF bigwigs were being -- at least
>> AFAICS -- quite arrogant about the so-called "Apache Way" being the
>> last word in how everything has to be done.
>>
>> This ultimately got me questioning openly how on earth they can say
>> this. In this Struts/Webwork merger, you have a tacit acceptance of
>> the fact that the developer community that was presumably doing things
>> according to the "Apache Way" (I mean Struts here) did not innovate,
>> and ended up having to bring in a codebase not developed at ASF
>> (Webwork) in order to have something reasonably up-to-date to offer.
>>
>> Yet you will still hear this people saying: "The Apache Way" is X and
>> pointing you to pages about this like they were scripture.
>>
>> So, my pressing them about the Struts 1.x codebase and that it
>> stagnated occurred in that context.
>>
>> You really have to understand the context in which conversations
>> developed.
>>
>>>
>>> By Jon's "logic" Windows development stagnated when the Windows ME
>>> code-base was abandoned and MS have serious questions to answer as to
>>> why they moved on to a better technology (WinNT Code Base). Not to
>>> Mention Apple really stagnated when they moved from OS 9 to the NeXT
>>> based OS X.
>>
>>
>>
>> Well, in both cases, there was a clear migration path offered to users
>> and I think there was far more clarity about what was going on.
>>
>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but before I brought this up, you didn't
>> really understand what was going on with this. So, at the very least,
>> the communication with users has been terrible.
>>
>> In any case, I am not "whining" that the superior technology (Webwork
>> in this case) is going to replace the inferior technology (Struts 1.x).
>>
>> That's not exactly my point. In terms of the overall open source
>> ecology, I have some real misgivings about a team that failed to
>> innovate imposing its culture and project management practices on the
>> community that really was able to innovate and be at the cutting edge.
>> This is problematic.
>>
>> Again, you have to understand the context of the discussion.
>>
>>>
>>> Besides, since I started using struts about 9 months ago Struts have
>>> moved on at least 5 minor versions, that's hardly stagnent now is it!
>>
>>
>>
>> Well, consider this. Step back and look at it: you could simply have
>> been using Struts 2.x for the last 9 months by using Webwork instead.
>>
>> So I think there's reason to look askance at what a great favor these
>> Struts guys have done for you. You've been using technology for the
>> last 9 months that the Struts developers themselves consider to be
>> inferior.
>>
>>>
>>> Stuts is moving FORWARD, the struts code base has been STRENGTHENED
>>> by the inclusion of WebWorks,
>>
>>
>>
>> It's not an inclusion, Bart. The Webwork codebase is simply replacing
>> the Struts 1.x codebase that you have been building your stuff on top of.
>>
>>> where on earth is this mythical stagnation? The only thing here that
>>> seems stagnent to me are John's posts. They are just the same thing
>>> over and over and over and over and over ......... again. We get it
>>> Jon, we know what you think, it's just that not everyone agrees with
>>> you and no matter how many times you say the same thing everyone will
>>> NEVER agree with you!
>>>
>>> This topic is dead, it has been for weeks, can we now please do the
>>> honourable thing and bury it!
>>
>>
>>
>> The topic has been avoided basically. In any case, if you still think
>> this topic is not worth talking about and other think it, why do you
>> care if they talk about it?
>>
>> Jonathan Revusky
>> --
>> lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>>
>>>
>>> Bart.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Bart Busschots <ba...@cs.nuim.ie>.
OK, I'm keeping this short:
1) No one put a gun to the WebWorks guys and made them become part of
struts, they chose that
2) The struts team now contains the WebWorks guys right? So there is no
division, they are the one team.
3) The reason I choose struts is because struts does things the Apache
way. I have great faith in the Apache way and that is not un-founded
faith, just look at the Apache Web server!
4) Being at the bleeding edge is not always a good thing. Stuts does
what it does well. I am very happy with the 1.X framework, it has worked
well for me and massively simplified a complex task. There may be
something more cutting edge out there but that does not make it better
to use. Support and availability of experts are often more important
factors and Struts has more to offer in that field than WebWorks did.
5) The merger/takeover is great for both Struts and WebWorks. Struts
gets the advangages of WebWorks code and WebWorks gets the advantage of
all the non-code stuff that Struts have obviously gotten right. They
have a great brand that is recognised!
6) I don't care about the personalities involved. As long as Struts
works all is well. I will judge the new merged Struts team by the code
they produce from here forward, not what half the team did or did not do
in the past. Time will tell, just let them get on with the task at hand
and let us all get on with our tasks ... building Web Apps!
Bart.
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
> Bart Busschots wrote:
>
>> Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the
>> struts guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather
>> than Struts 1.X.
>
>
> I'm not precisely whining about that.
>
> Anyway, I have one question that intrigues me. Did you understand what
> was going on with this before today?
>
> I mean, this has been in the works for over 3 months, I think.
>
>> So the problem seems to be that two groups trying to achieve the same
>> thing have come together and merged. Hang on a sec .... that's NOT a
>> problem. The struts guys saw that webworks was good and adopted it.
>> GREAT, BRILLIANT! They are DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE USERS, i.e. US!
>
>
> Well, Bart, Webwork has been there for years, available for guys like
> you to use. The Struts guys didn't do the work to make that technology
> come about. That was done by the Webwork guys of course.
>
> They're not making anything available to you that wasn't already
> available. So, all this stuff about BRILLIANT, shouting this in all
> caps, seems a tad over the top to me...
>
> The only thing that's going on is that Struts 1.x fell way behind
> being the state of the art. Due to its visibility/projection
> non-technical assets, it was able to attract new users, like you -- as
> recently as 9 months ago, despite being technically obsolete.
>
> Now you've made an investment, building applications on top of Struts
> 1.x and it's brilliant that they move to the Webwork codebase
> (relabelling that as Struts Action 2.)
>
> BUT.... you could have simply avoided all the bother -- if you knew
> what was going on -- by using Webwork in the first place!
>
>
>> Just because you switch to a new track does NOT mean you have
>> stagnated! It means you are moving foward in a positive manner. How
>> on earth can that be a bad thing and how on earth can such obvious
>> progress forward be stagnation!
>
>
> Well, there are various issues here. You have the fact that the
> innovative work was done elsewhere, yet the community that, somehow,
> despite its built-in advantages, was not able to innovate, swallows
> the community that did the innovative work, and imposes their culture
> and project management practices on them. This is, in general, a kind
> of problem IMO.
>
> This discussion originated in the context of discussing open source
> project management. Various Struts/ASF bigwigs were being -- at least
> AFAICS -- quite arrogant about the so-called "Apache Way" being the
> last word in how everything has to be done.
>
> This ultimately got me questioning openly how on earth they can say
> this. In this Struts/Webwork merger, you have a tacit acceptance of
> the fact that the developer community that was presumably doing things
> according to the "Apache Way" (I mean Struts here) did not innovate,
> and ended up having to bring in a codebase not developed at ASF
> (Webwork) in order to have something reasonably up-to-date to offer.
>
> Yet you will still hear this people saying: "The Apache Way" is X and
> pointing you to pages about this like they were scripture.
>
> So, my pressing them about the Struts 1.x codebase and that it
> stagnated occurred in that context.
>
> You really have to understand the context in which conversations
> developed.
>
>>
>> By Jon's "logic" Windows development stagnated when the Windows ME
>> code-base was abandoned and MS have serious questions to answer as to
>> why they moved on to a better technology (WinNT Code Base). Not to
>> Mention Apple really stagnated when they moved from OS 9 to the NeXT
>> based OS X.
>
>
> Well, in both cases, there was a clear migration path offered to users
> and I think there was far more clarity about what was going on.
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but before I brought this up, you didn't
> really understand what was going on with this. So, at the very least,
> the communication with users has been terrible.
>
> In any case, I am not "whining" that the superior technology (Webwork
> in this case) is going to replace the inferior technology (Struts 1.x).
>
> That's not exactly my point. In terms of the overall open source
> ecology, I have some real misgivings about a team that failed to
> innovate imposing its culture and project management practices on the
> community that really was able to innovate and be at the cutting edge.
> This is problematic.
>
> Again, you have to understand the context of the discussion.
>
>>
>> Besides, since I started using struts about 9 months ago Struts have
>> moved on at least 5 minor versions, that's hardly stagnent now is it!
>
>
> Well, consider this. Step back and look at it: you could simply have
> been using Struts 2.x for the last 9 months by using Webwork instead.
>
> So I think there's reason to look askance at what a great favor these
> Struts guys have done for you. You've been using technology for the
> last 9 months that the Struts developers themselves consider to be
> inferior.
>
>>
>> Stuts is moving FORWARD, the struts code base has been STRENGTHENED
>> by the inclusion of WebWorks,
>
>
> It's not an inclusion, Bart. The Webwork codebase is simply replacing
> the Struts 1.x codebase that you have been building your stuff on top of.
>
>> where on earth is this mythical stagnation? The only thing here that
>> seems stagnent to me are John's posts. They are just the same thing
>> over and over and over and over and over ......... again. We get it
>> Jon, we know what you think, it's just that not everyone agrees with
>> you and no matter how many times you say the same thing everyone will
>> NEVER agree with you!
>>
>> This topic is dead, it has been for weeks, can we now please do the
>> honourable thing and bury it!
>
>
> The topic has been avoided basically. In any case, if you still think
> this topic is not worth talking about and other think it, why do you
> care if they talk about it?
>
> Jonathan Revusky
> --
> lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>
>>
>> Bart.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: The Mytical stagnation
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <re...@wanadoo.es>.
Bart Busschots wrote:
> Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
> guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than Struts
> 1.X.
I'm not precisely whining about that.
Anyway, I have one question that intrigues me. Did you understand what
was going on with this before today?
I mean, this has been in the works for over 3 months, I think.
>So the problem seems to be that two groups trying to achieve the
> same thing have come together and merged. Hang on a sec .... that's NOT
> a problem. The struts guys saw that webworks was good and adopted it.
> GREAT, BRILLIANT! They are DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE USERS, i.e. US!
Well, Bart, Webwork has been there for years, available for guys like
you to use. The Struts guys didn't do the work to make that technology
come about. That was done by the Webwork guys of course.
They're not making anything available to you that wasn't already
available. So, all this stuff about BRILLIANT, shouting this in all
caps, seems a tad over the top to me...
The only thing that's going on is that Struts 1.x fell way behind being
the state of the art. Due to its visibility/projection non-technical
assets, it was able to attract new users, like you -- as recently as 9
months ago, despite being technically obsolete.
Now you've made an investment, building applications on top of Struts
1.x and it's brilliant that they move to the Webwork codebase
(relabelling that as Struts Action 2.)
BUT.... you could have simply avoided all the bother -- if you knew what
was going on -- by using Webwork in the first place!
> Just because you switch to a new track does NOT mean you have stagnated!
> It means you are moving foward in a positive manner. How on earth can
> that be a bad thing and how on earth can such obvious progress forward
> be stagnation!
Well, there are various issues here. You have the fact that the
innovative work was done elsewhere, yet the community that, somehow,
despite its built-in advantages, was not able to innovate, swallows the
community that did the innovative work, and imposes their culture and
project management practices on them. This is, in general, a kind of
problem IMO.
This discussion originated in the context of discussing open source
project management. Various Struts/ASF bigwigs were being -- at least
AFAICS -- quite arrogant about the so-called "Apache Way" being the last
word in how everything has to be done.
This ultimately got me questioning openly how on earth they can say
this. In this Struts/Webwork merger, you have a tacit acceptance of the
fact that the developer community that was presumably doing things
according to the "Apache Way" (I mean Struts here) did not innovate, and
ended up having to bring in a codebase not developed at ASF (Webwork) in
order to have something reasonably up-to-date to offer.
Yet you will still hear this people saying: "The Apache Way" is X and
pointing you to pages about this like they were scripture.
So, my pressing them about the Struts 1.x codebase and that it stagnated
occurred in that context.
You really have to understand the context in which conversations developed.
>
> By Jon's "logic" Windows development stagnated when the Windows ME
> code-base was abandoned and MS have serious questions to answer as to
> why they moved on to a better technology (WinNT Code Base). Not to
> Mention Apple really stagnated when they moved from OS 9 to the NeXT
> based OS X.
Well, in both cases, there was a clear migration path offered to users
and I think there was far more clarity about what was going on.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but before I brought this up, you didn't really
understand what was going on with this. So, at the very least, the
communication with users has been terrible.
In any case, I am not "whining" that the superior technology (Webwork in
this case) is going to replace the inferior technology (Struts 1.x).
That's not exactly my point. In terms of the overall open source
ecology, I have some real misgivings about a team that failed to
innovate imposing its culture and project management practices on the
community that really was able to innovate and be at the cutting edge.
This is problematic.
Again, you have to understand the context of the discussion.
>
> Besides, since I started using struts about 9 months ago Struts have
> moved on at least 5 minor versions, that's hardly stagnent now is it!
Well, consider this. Step back and look at it: you could simply have
been using Struts 2.x for the last 9 months by using Webwork instead.
So I think there's reason to look askance at what a great favor these
Struts guys have done for you. You've been using technology for the last
9 months that the Struts developers themselves consider to be inferior.
>
> Stuts is moving FORWARD, the struts code base has been STRENGTHENED by
> the inclusion of WebWorks,
It's not an inclusion, Bart. The Webwork codebase is simply replacing
the Struts 1.x codebase that you have been building your stuff on top of.
> where on earth is this mythical stagnation?
> The only thing here that seems stagnent to me are John's posts. They are
> just the same thing over and over and over and over and over .........
> again. We get it Jon, we know what you think, it's just that not
> everyone agrees with you and no matter how many times you say the same
> thing everyone will NEVER agree with you!
>
> This topic is dead, it has been for weeks, can we now please do the
> honourable thing and bury it!
The topic has been avoided basically. In any case, if you still think
this topic is not worth talking about and other think it, why do you
care if they talk about it?
Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>
> Bart.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org