[PROPOSAL] Merger with WebWork

[Ted Husted <te...@gmail.com>]

Presented by: Don Brown, Ted Husted, Jason Carreira, and Patrick Lightbody

Between the Clarity hubbub [1] and the Java Web Alignment brouhaha
[2], it came up that WebWork would like to merge with another
framework. Ted and Don followed up with the two core WebWork
developers, Patrick Lightbody and Jason Carreira. As it turns out,
they are very interested in merging WebWork with Struts. An archive of
our discussions is available as a Quick Topic thread [3].

As some of you know, the underlying idea behind Ti was to use WebWork
as the core of Struts Action Framework 2.x. Conceptually, WebWork and
Struts 1.x are very similar. We've often said, without embarrassment,
that WebWork does many things better than Struts 1.x. Meanwhile,
WebWork has the ability to provide a layer of almost full
backwards-compatibility for Struts 1.x, and we have already
demonstrated we can integrate Beehive's (very cool) Page Flow with
WebWork.

PROPOSAL: Bring WebWork into Struts through Struts Ti

We would to amend the Struts Ti sandbox proposal to provide for
merging WebWork 2.2 into our codebase. The WebWork merger would be Ti
phase 1. Much of the work now proposed for Ti would become phase 2.

* Ti phase 1 = WebWork 2.2 + Struts 1.x compatibility library and
migration tools
* Ti phase 2 = phase 1 + Commons Chain integration + Beehive's Page
Flow + simplified annotations + quick development mode

When the Ti phase 1 has coalesced and is providing a high degree of
Struts 1.x compatibility, our intention would be to propose Ti as a
Struts Action Framework 2.x candidate. Until that time, we would
continue to consider Ti a "next generation" proposal and, pending a
decison by the PMC, avoid attaching the 2.x label to Ti.

When BeeHive Page Flow matures, it may be proposed to be merged with
Struts Ti as phase 2. That work could also be positioned as a new
subproject depending on where the PMC feels it would be better suited.
As we work on Struts Ti, we would also expect that work would continue
on Struts Action 1.x, perhaps including feature changes that would
bring the codebases even closer together.

To get started, we could bring the WebWork codebase into the
Foundation through the Incubator. As part of the proposal to the
Incubator, we could elect Patrick and Jason as committers, so that
they could help us get Ti ready for an acceptance vote.

There is also a Confluence space [4] setup to manage documents
relating to the proposal.

-- Don Brown, Ted Husted, Jason Carreira, and Patrick Lightbody.

[1] Clarity - http://opensource2.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/WAG/Clarity

[2] Java Web Alignment Group -
http://opensource2.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/WAG/Home

[3] Quick Topic Thread - http://www.quicktopic.com/33/H/KBfrHFUehSj/p16.1#QTmsg4

[4] Confluence space - http://opensource.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/x/kQY

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Merger with WebWork

[Ted Husted <te...@gmail.com>]

On 11/26/05, Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm getting ahead of myself, though. There's _lots_ more to discuss. ;-) To
> get the ball rolling, if everyone else is on board with this, we'll want to
> start, as the proposal suggests, with bringing the code into the Incubator,
> and bringing Patrick and Jason on board. I would hope - and expect - that
> running the Incubator gauntlet should be relatively painless in this case.

For an IP transfer to an existing proposal, there's a special checklist now.

* http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html

Once we can confirm that the eight action items are complete, and we're done.

* If applicable, make sure that any associated name does not already
exist and check www.nameprotect.com to be sure that the name is not
already trademarked for an existing software product.

* Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF
been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the
package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project.

* Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have been
updated to reflect the new ASF copyright.

* Check that all active committers have a signed CLA on record.

* Remind active committers that they are responsible for ensuring that
a Corporate CLA is recorded if such is is required to authorize their
contributions under their individual CLA.

* Check and make sure that for all items included with the
distribution that is not under the Apache license, we have the right
to combine with Apache-licensed code and redistribute.

* Check and make sure that all items depended upon by the project is
covered by one or more of the following approved licenses: Apache,
BSD, Artistic, MIT/X, MIT/W3C, MPL 1.1, or something with essentially
the same terms.

* Has the receiving PMC voted to accept it?

-Ted.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Merger with WebWork

[Joe Germuska <Jo...@Germuska.com>]

At 2:34 PM -0800 11/26/05, Martin Cooper wrote:
>Great stuff! The idea of combining what I consider to be the two leading
>action-oriented frameworks is very appealing. :-) I would definitely like to
>pursue this.

+1 -- I think this is a very promising direction...

Joe

-- 
Joe Germuska            
Joe@Germuska.com  
http://blog.germuska.com    
"Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction"  -The Ex

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Merger with WebWork

[Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org>]

Great stuff! The idea of combining what I consider to be the two leading
action-oriented frameworks is very appealing. :-) I would definitely like to
pursue this.

We'll probably need to do some juggling to make the two-phase Ti approach
work, but that sounds like a decent way to go about it. As for the
relationship with the existing Struts architecture, my preference would be
that we try very hard to provide a good migration strategy, but not
necessarily 100% compatibility. By that, I mean that I'd have a preference
for developing tools to morph a Classic app into a Ti app, over bulking out
Ti with stuff that's there solely for compatibility.

I'm getting ahead of myself, though. There's _lots_ more to discuss. ;-) To
get the ball rolling, if everyone else is on board with this, we'll want to
start, as the proposal suggests, with bringing the code into the Incubator,
and bringing Patrick and Jason on board. I would hope - and expect - that
running the Incubator gauntlet should be relatively painless in this case.

Maybe we can even announce something at ApacheCon. :-)

--
Martin Cooper


On 11/25/05, Ted Husted <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Presented by: Don Brown, Ted Husted, Jason Carreira, and Patrick Lightbody
>
> Between the Clarity hubbub [1] and the Java Web Alignment brouhaha
> [2], it came up that WebWork would like to merge with another
> framework. Ted and Don followed up with the two core WebWork
> developers, Patrick Lightbody and Jason Carreira. As it turns out,
> they are very interested in merging WebWork with Struts. An archive of
> our discussions is available as a Quick Topic thread [3].
>
> As some of you know, the underlying idea behind Ti was to use WebWork
> as the core of Struts Action Framework 2.x. Conceptually, WebWork and
> Struts 1.x are very similar. We've often said, without embarrassment,
> that WebWork does many things better than Struts 1.x. Meanwhile,
> WebWork has the ability to provide a layer of almost full
> backwards-compatibility for Struts 1.x, and we have already
> demonstrated we can integrate Beehive's (very cool) Page Flow with
> WebWork.
>
> PROPOSAL: Bring WebWork into Struts through Struts Ti
>
> We would to amend the Struts Ti sandbox proposal to provide for
> merging WebWork 2.2 into our codebase. The WebWork merger would be Ti
> phase 1. Much of the work now proposed for Ti would become phase 2.
>
> * Ti phase 1 = WebWork 2.2 + Struts 1.x compatibility library and
> migration tools
> * Ti phase 2 = phase 1 + Commons Chain integration + Beehive's Page
> Flow + simplified annotations + quick development mode
>
> When the Ti phase 1 has coalesced and is providing a high degree of
> Struts 1.x compatibility, our intention would be to propose Ti as a
> Struts Action Framework 2.x candidate. Until that time, we would
> continue to consider Ti a "next generation" proposal and, pending a
> decison by the PMC, avoid attaching the 2.x label to Ti.
>
> When BeeHive Page Flow matures, it may be proposed to be merged with
> Struts Ti as phase 2. That work could also be positioned as a new
> subproject depending on where the PMC feels it would be better suited.
> As we work on Struts Ti, we would also expect that work would continue
> on Struts Action 1.x, perhaps including feature changes that would
> bring the codebases even closer together.
>
> To get started, we could bring the WebWork codebase into the
> Foundation through the Incubator. As part of the proposal to the
> Incubator, we could elect Patrick and Jason as committers, so that
> they could help us get Ti ready for an acceptance vote.
>
> There is also a Confluence space [4] setup to manage documents
> relating to the proposal.
>
> -- Don Brown, Ted Husted, Jason Carreira, and Patrick Lightbody.
>
> [1] Clarity -
> http://opensource2.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/WAG/Clarity
>
> [2] Java Web Alignment Group -
> http://opensource2.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/WAG/Home
>
> [3] Quick Topic Thread -
> http://www.quicktopic.com/33/H/KBfrHFUehSj/p16.1#QTmsg4
>
> [4] Confluence space -
> http://opensource.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/x/kQY
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Merger with WebWork

[Nathan Bubna <nb...@gmail.com>]

interesting. and promising!  i'll keep on eye on this.  webwork has
long had better velocity integration that struts.  this proposed
merger might either obviate the need for VelocityStruts integration in
VelocityTools or else provide an opportune time to shift some of that
code over to the "StrutsWork" community. :)  if i haven't already
noticed it happening, feel free to ping velocity-dev@jakarta if/when
you work on merging WebWork's Velocity support.  i'd be happy to help
with that.

On 11/25/05, Ted Husted <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Presented by: Don Brown, Ted Husted, Jason Carreira, and Patrick Lightbody
>
> Between the Clarity hubbub [1] and the Java Web Alignment brouhaha
> [2], it came up that WebWork would like to merge with another
> framework. Ted and Don followed up with the two core WebWork
> developers, Patrick Lightbody and Jason Carreira. As it turns out,
> they are very interested in merging WebWork with Struts. An archive of
> our discussions is available as a Quick Topic thread [3].
>
> As some of you know, the underlying idea behind Ti was to use WebWork
> as the core of Struts Action Framework 2.x. Conceptually, WebWork and
> Struts 1.x are very similar. We've often said, without embarrassment,
> that WebWork does many things better than Struts 1.x. Meanwhile,
> WebWork has the ability to provide a layer of almost full
> backwards-compatibility for Struts 1.x, and we have already
> demonstrated we can integrate Beehive's (very cool) Page Flow with
> WebWork.
>
> PROPOSAL: Bring WebWork into Struts through Struts Ti
>
> We would to amend the Struts Ti sandbox proposal to provide for
> merging WebWork 2.2 into our codebase. The WebWork merger would be Ti
> phase 1. Much of the work now proposed for Ti would become phase 2.
>
> * Ti phase 1 = WebWork 2.2 + Struts 1.x compatibility library and
> migration tools
> * Ti phase 2 = phase 1 + Commons Chain integration + Beehive's Page
> Flow + simplified annotations + quick development mode
>
> When the Ti phase 1 has coalesced and is providing a high degree of
> Struts 1.x compatibility, our intention would be to propose Ti as a
> Struts Action Framework 2.x candidate. Until that time, we would
> continue to consider Ti a "next generation" proposal and, pending a
> decison by the PMC, avoid attaching the 2.x label to Ti.
>
> When BeeHive Page Flow matures, it may be proposed to be merged with
> Struts Ti as phase 2. That work could also be positioned as a new
> subproject depending on where the PMC feels it would be better suited.
> As we work on Struts Ti, we would also expect that work would continue
> on Struts Action 1.x, perhaps including feature changes that would
> bring the codebases even closer together.
>
> To get started, we could bring the WebWork codebase into the
> Foundation through the Incubator. As part of the proposal to the
> Incubator, we could elect Patrick and Jason as committers, so that
> they could help us get Ti ready for an acceptance vote.
>
> There is also a Confluence space [4] setup to manage documents
> relating to the proposal.
>
> -- Don Brown, Ted Husted, Jason Carreira, and Patrick Lightbody.
>
> [1] Clarity - http://opensource2.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/WAG/Clarity
>
> [2] Java Web Alignment Group -
> http://opensource2.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/WAG/Home
>
> [3] Quick Topic Thread - http://www.quicktopic.com/33/H/KBfrHFUehSj/p16.1#QTmsg4
>
> [4] Confluence space - http://opensource.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/x/kQY
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Merger with WebWork

[Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>]

Capital!

On 11/25/05, Ted Husted <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Presented by: Don Brown, Ted Husted, Jason Carreira, and Patrick Lightbody
>
> Between the Clarity hubbub [1] and the Java Web Alignment brouhaha
> [2], it came up that WebWork would like to merge with another
> framework. Ted and Don followed up with the two core WebWork
> developers, Patrick Lightbody and Jason Carreira. As it turns out,
> they are very interested in merging WebWork with Struts. An archive of
> our discussions is available as a Quick Topic thread [3].
>
> As some of you know, the underlying idea behind Ti was to use WebWork
> as the core of Struts Action Framework 2.x. Conceptually, WebWork and
> Struts 1.x are very similar. We've often said, without embarrassment,
> that WebWork does many things better than Struts 1.x. Meanwhile,
> WebWork has the ability to provide a layer of almost full
> backwards-compatibility for Struts 1.x, and we have already
> demonstrated we can integrate Beehive's (very cool) Page Flow with
> WebWork.
>
> PROPOSAL: Bring WebWork into Struts through Struts Ti
>
> We would to amend the Struts Ti sandbox proposal to provide for
> merging WebWork 2.2 into our codebase. The WebWork merger would be Ti
> phase 1. Much of the work now proposed for Ti would become phase 2.
>
> * Ti phase 1 = WebWork 2.2 + Struts 1.x compatibility library and
> migration tools
> * Ti phase 2 = phase 1 + Commons Chain integration + Beehive's Page
> Flow + simplified annotations + quick development mode
>
> When the Ti phase 1 has coalesced and is providing a high degree of
> Struts 1.x compatibility, our intention would be to propose Ti as a
> Struts Action Framework 2.x candidate. Until that time, we would
> continue to consider Ti a "next generation" proposal and, pending a
> decison by the PMC, avoid attaching the 2.x label to Ti.
>
> When BeeHive Page Flow matures, it may be proposed to be merged with
> Struts Ti as phase 2. That work could also be positioned as a new
> subproject depending on where the PMC feels it would be better suited.
> As we work on Struts Ti, we would also expect that work would continue
> on Struts Action 1.x, perhaps including feature changes that would
> bring the codebases even closer together.
>
> To get started, we could bring the WebWork codebase into the
> Foundation through the Incubator. As part of the proposal to the
> Incubator, we could elect Patrick and Jason as committers, so that
> they could help us get Ti ready for an acceptance vote.
>
> There is also a Confluence space [4] setup to manage documents
> relating to the proposal.
>
> -- Don Brown, Ted Husted, Jason Carreira, and Patrick Lightbody.
>
> [1] Clarity -
> http://opensource2.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/WAG/Clarity
>
> [2] Java Web Alignment Group -
> http://opensource2.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/WAG/Home
>
> [3] Quick Topic Thread -
> http://www.quicktopic.com/33/H/KBfrHFUehSj/p16.1#QTmsg4
>
> [4] Confluence space -
> http://opensource.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/x/kQY
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>


--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~