You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@struts.apache.org by Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org> on 2005/02/01 12:50:13 UTC
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:03:09 -0500, Alex Kravets wrote:
>�So what do you guys think?
>�http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=31509
An important clarification we'll make to the FAQ is that "by doing our job right" we mean "not break backward compatibility" in the ongoing 1.x series.
There's more than a few things that people want to do with Struts 1.x yet. We're approaching Struts 1.3, and already, the Milestone page [http://struts.apache.org/milestones.html] is looking forward to Struts 1.6.
If need be, we can go on to Struts 1.42 or Struts 1.2025. If there's interest, there could be another five, ten, or fifty years of Struts 1.x development.
A year ago, we talked about a Struts 2.x revolution to give us a clean start on the codebase. But, most everyone wanted to evolve the Struts 1.x codebase instead.
So, that's what we are doing: evolving Struts 1.x, step by step, innovation by innovation, deprecation by deprecation :)
If we never break backward compatibility, and we never start a new codebase, then we never need to roll the major version number.
Meanwhile, another potentially great framework has come along: Shale. Like Struts, Shale is MVC web framework, but it doesn't share any code or architectural hallmarks with Struts 1.x. We could call it Struts 2.x, but we could also fork Maverick, Spring MVC, Tapestry, or WebWork and call any of those Struts 2.x, if that's what the community wanted.
But, as near as we can tell, that's not what they community wants. The volunteers are showing by their commits that we want to evolve Struts 1.x and, at the same time, also work on Shale 1.x.
As someone mentioned elsewhere: different strokes for different folks: different technologies for different requirements.
People wanted to do both and proved it with their commits. So both is what we are doing :)
And, if someone comes up with a third thing, based on dynamic ECMA Script or something, maybe we'll do that too. :)
-Ted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
Posted by Vic <vi...@friendvu.com>.
Alex Kravets wrote:
> Well I think 70% is a little bit too much
> http://www.manageability.org/polls/what-is-the-best-java-web-framework
>
Yup, agree.
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=98268169919293&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=97660305929382&w=2
Here are some other Struts is dead threads in 2001.
Each framework is good at what it does.
.V
--
Forums, Boards, Blogs and News in RiA <http://www.boardVU.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
Posted by Alex Kravets <ak...@kligerweiss.com>.
This should have been a quote:
Accroding to latest "market share" reportring (by Raible) Struts is
like 70% of market share. (Having said that, I wish that people that use
Struts becuase it's popular go away, one should use own judgment; if
everyone used EJB, would you use that too? or would you jump of a
bridge? Waren Buffet has a book and a chapter on Lemmings)
Alex Kravets wrote:
> Well I think 70% is a little bit too much
> http://www.manageability.org/polls/what-is-the-best-java-web-framework
>
> Accroding to latest "market share" reportring (by Raible) Struts is
> like 70% of market share. (Having said that, I wish that people that
> use Struts becuase it's popular go away, one should use own
> judgment; if everyone used EJB, would you use that too? or would you
> jump of a bridge? Waren Buffet has a book and a chapter on Lemmings)
>
> But at the end of the day most people tend to learn
> languages/platforms/frameworks that are in demand (remember when HTML
> coders were payed $70K?). Most people will not spend time on learning
> something that they think/know is good but the rest of the world does
> not, because most people do what they do to support themselves
> financially. The rest of does it because they are scientists.
>
>
> Vic wrote:
>
>> I know you asked Ted/Craig but Tapestry is a Apache project, like
>> Struts, a good framework that is View centric, home page says: "
>> Tapestry is an alternative to scripting environments such as
>> JavaServer Pages or Velocity"
>> Accroding to latest "market share" reportring (by Raible) Struts is
>> like 70% of market share. (Having said that, I wish that people that
>> use Struts becuase it's popular go away, one should use own judgment;
>> if everyone used EJB, would you use that too? or would you jump of a
>> bridge? Waren Buffet has a book and a chapter on Lemmings)
>> Even if Struts loses 10% every year, that would make it say 5% or 3%,
>> or.... 1% say in many years.
>> Tapestry, JSF, WebWorks, Symphony, etc. are all fine comunities that
>> have that kind of a market share, so it would not be bad at all. (and
>> then all the questions about is this the most pouplar one would go
>> away).
>>
>> WHICH ONE FITS YOU NEEDS BEST BASED ON YOUR ANAYLSIS?
>>
>> (It's a bit like sayind what method call you you call in your code?
>> I'ts up to you).
>>
>> Alex Kravets wrote:
>>
>>> Ted, Graig,
>>> 've read some posts/blogs where people who've used Struts and now
>>> use Tapestry say that they will never go back to Struts again.
>>
>>
>>
>> see above. If you have similar needs as them maybe you should do that.
>> In 2000, http://barracudamvc.org/Barracuda/index.html would say they
>> are better and Turbine did; there was allways competition.
>>
>>> Is this what Struts Shale tries to change/disprove?
>>
>>
>>
>> I hope not!!!
>>
>> I feel like I am the old Lakers, #1, and everyone hates you. And yes,
>> I hate the Lakers. :-P
>>
>> .V
>>
>>
>
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
Posted by Hubert Rabago <hr...@gmail.com>.
I guess it depends on which group of 700 people you ask, and also how
you ask the question:
http://www.onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2004/05/19/2004-survey.html
"What are you using?" (the question asked by OnJava, and is what
market share would be based on) is different from "What is the best?"
(asked by the blog below), which is also different from "What is the
most appropriate for the application you're developing?" (which people
on a team should answer).
I wonder where Raible got his figures.
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:50:27 -0500, Alex Kravets
<ak...@kligerweiss.com> wrote:
> Well I think 70% is a little bit too much
> http://www.manageability.org/polls/what-is-the-best-java-web-framework
>
> Accroding to latest "market share" reportring (by Raible) Struts is
> like 70% of market share. (Having said that, I wish that people that use
> Struts becuase it's popular go away, one should use own judgment; if
> everyone used EJB, would you use that too? or would you jump of a
> bridge? Waren Buffet has a book and a chapter on Lemmings)
>
> But at the end of the day most people tend to learn
> languages/platforms/frameworks that are in demand (remember when HTML
> coders were payed $70K?). Most people will not spend time on learning
> something that they think/know is good but the rest of the world does
> not, because most people do what they do to support themselves
> financially. The rest of does it because they are scientists.
>
>
> Vic wrote:
>
> > I know you asked Ted/Craig but Tapestry is a Apache project, like
> > Struts, a good framework that is View centric, home page says: "
> > Tapestry is an alternative to scripting environments such as
> > JavaServer Pages or Velocity"
> > Accroding to latest "market share" reportring (by Raible) Struts is
> > like 70% of market share. (Having said that, I wish that people that
> > use Struts becuase it's popular go away, one should use own judgment;
> > if everyone used EJB, would you use that too? or would you jump of a
> > bridge? Waren Buffet has a book and a chapter on Lemmings)
> > Even if Struts loses 10% every year, that would make it say 5% or 3%,
> > or.... 1% say in many years.
> > Tapestry, JSF, WebWorks, Symphony, etc. are all fine comunities that
> > have that kind of a market share, so it would not be bad at all. (and
> > then all the questions about is this the most pouplar one would go away).
> >
> > WHICH ONE FITS YOU NEEDS BEST BASED ON YOUR ANAYLSIS?
> >
> > (It's a bit like sayind what method call you you call in your code?
> > I'ts up to you).
> >
> > Alex Kravets wrote:
> >
> >> Ted, Graig,
> >> 've read some posts/blogs where people who've used Struts and now use
> >> Tapestry say that they will never go back to Struts again.
> >
> >
> > see above. If you have similar needs as them maybe you should do that.
> > In 2000, http://barracudamvc.org/Barracuda/index.html would say they
> > are better and Turbine did; there was allways competition.
> >
> >> Is this what Struts Shale tries to change/disprove?
> >
> >
> > I hope not!!!
> >
> > I feel like I am the old Lakers, #1, and everyone hates you. And yes,
> > I hate the Lakers. :-P
> >
> > .V
> >
> >
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
Posted by Alex Kravets <ak...@kligerweiss.com>.
True. Choice is good. The whole notion of capitalism is based on this.
Choice is a product of competition, and when there is competition better
products come out as a result of competition between number of other
products. Indeed choice is good.
Woodchuck wrote:
>hihi all,
>
>just want to add my 2 cents
>
>i think it's simply a time issue. if i had time, naturally i'd like to
>evaluate all possible choices before deciding which framework to use.
>but given the amount of framework spin-offs we have these days, it's a
>luxury not many ppl will have.
>
>think about a new java web app developer starting out right now. with
>all the choices he/she faces, can you blame them for asking "which is
>most popular?". going with the flow is a natural response when
>individuals don't have the time to thoroughly investigate all the
>frameworks to come to their own decision. and even if someone did take
>the time to investigate all frameworks for their particular project, it
>would not surprising that their opinion may change later on.
>evaluating frameworks thoroughly is not a trivial task, you need to
>spend the time to really discover the strengths/weaknesses for any
>project of reasonable size.
>
>choice is good. sure. but i also think there's confusion when there
>is so many ways to do the same thing. this is the irony that will
>always be there. i think feeling 'overwhelmed' would be a safe
>assumption for anyone starting out right now.
>
>woodchuck
>
>
>--- Alex Kravets <ak...@kligerweiss.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Well I think 70% is a little bit too much
>>
>>
>>
>http://www.manageability.org/polls/what-is-the-best-java-web-framework
>
>
>> Accroding to latest "market share" reportring (by Raible) Struts
>>is
>>like 70% of market share. (Having said that, I wish that people that
>>use
>>Struts becuase it's popular go away, one should use own judgment;
>>if
>>everyone used EJB, would you use that too? or would you jump of a
>>bridge? Waren Buffet has a book and a chapter on Lemmings)
>>
>>But at the end of the day most people tend to learn
>>languages/platforms/frameworks that are in demand (remember when HTML
>>
>>coders were payed $70K?). Most people will not spend time on learning
>>
>>something that they think/know is good but the rest of the world does
>>
>>not, because most people do what they do to support themselves
>>financially. The rest of does it because they are scientists.
>>
>>
>>Vic wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I know you asked Ted/Craig but Tapestry is a Apache project, like
>>>Struts, a good framework that is View centric, home page says: "
>>>Tapestry is an alternative to scripting environments such as
>>>JavaServer Pages or Velocity"
>>>Accroding to latest "market share" reportring (by Raible) Struts is
>>>
>>>
>>>like 70% of market share. (Having said that, I wish that people
>>>
>>>
>>that
>>
>>
>>>use Struts becuase it's popular go away, one should use own
>>>
>>>
>>judgment;
>>
>>
>>>if everyone used EJB, would you use that too? or would you jump of
>>>
>>>
>>a
>>
>>
>>>bridge? Waren Buffet has a book and a chapter on Lemmings)
>>>Even if Struts loses 10% every year, that would make it say 5% or
>>>
>>>
>>3%,
>>
>>
>>>or.... 1% say in many years.
>>>Tapestry, JSF, WebWorks, Symphony, etc. are all fine comunities
>>>
>>>
>>that
>>
>>
>>>have that kind of a market share, so it would not be bad at all.
>>>
>>>
>>(and
>>
>>
>>>then all the questions about is this the most pouplar one would go
>>>
>>>
>>away).
>>
>>
>>>WHICH ONE FITS YOU NEEDS BEST BASED ON YOUR ANAYLSIS?
>>>
>>>(It's a bit like sayind what method call you you call in your code?
>>>
>>>
>>>I'ts up to you).
>>>
>>>Alex Kravets wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Ted, Graig,
>>>>'ve read some posts/blogs where people who've used Struts and now
>>>>
>>>>
>>use
>>
>>
>>>>Tapestry say that they will never go back to Struts again.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>see above. If you have similar needs as them maybe you should do
>>>
>>>
>>that.
>>
>>
>>>In 2000, http://barracudamvc.org/Barracuda/index.html would say
>>>
>>>
>>they
>>
>>
>>>are better and Turbine did; there was allways competition.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Is this what Struts Shale tries to change/disprove?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I hope not!!!
>>>
>>>I feel like I am the old Lakers, #1, and everyone hates you. And
>>>
>>>
>>yes,
>>
>>
>>>I hate the Lakers. :-P
>>>
>>>.V
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
>http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
>
>
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
Posted by Woodchuck <wo...@yahoo.com>.
hihi all,
just want to add my 2 cents
i think it's simply a time issue. if i had time, naturally i'd like to
evaluate all possible choices before deciding which framework to use.
but given the amount of framework spin-offs we have these days, it's a
luxury not many ppl will have.
think about a new java web app developer starting out right now. with
all the choices he/she faces, can you blame them for asking "which is
most popular?". going with the flow is a natural response when
individuals don't have the time to thoroughly investigate all the
frameworks to come to their own decision. and even if someone did take
the time to investigate all frameworks for their particular project, it
would not surprising that their opinion may change later on.
evaluating frameworks thoroughly is not a trivial task, you need to
spend the time to really discover the strengths/weaknesses for any
project of reasonable size.
choice is good. sure. but i also think there's confusion when there
is so many ways to do the same thing. this is the irony that will
always be there. i think feeling 'overwhelmed' would be a safe
assumption for anyone starting out right now.
woodchuck
--- Alex Kravets <ak...@kligerweiss.com> wrote:
> Well I think 70% is a little bit too much
>
http://www.manageability.org/polls/what-is-the-best-java-web-framework
>
> Accroding to latest "market share" reportring (by Raible) Struts
> is
> like 70% of market share. (Having said that, I wish that people that
> use
> Struts becuase it's popular go away, one should use own judgment;
> if
> everyone used EJB, would you use that too? or would you jump of a
> bridge? Waren Buffet has a book and a chapter on Lemmings)
>
> But at the end of the day most people tend to learn
> languages/platforms/frameworks that are in demand (remember when HTML
>
> coders were payed $70K?). Most people will not spend time on learning
>
> something that they think/know is good but the rest of the world does
>
> not, because most people do what they do to support themselves
> financially. The rest of does it because they are scientists.
>
>
> Vic wrote:
>
> > I know you asked Ted/Craig but Tapestry is a Apache project, like
> > Struts, a good framework that is View centric, home page says: "
> > Tapestry is an alternative to scripting environments such as
> > JavaServer Pages or Velocity"
> > Accroding to latest "market share" reportring (by Raible) Struts is
>
> > like 70% of market share. (Having said that, I wish that people
> that
> > use Struts becuase it's popular go away, one should use own
> judgment;
> > if everyone used EJB, would you use that too? or would you jump of
> a
> > bridge? Waren Buffet has a book and a chapter on Lemmings)
> > Even if Struts loses 10% every year, that would make it say 5% or
> 3%,
> > or.... 1% say in many years.
> > Tapestry, JSF, WebWorks, Symphony, etc. are all fine comunities
> that
> > have that kind of a market share, so it would not be bad at all.
> (and
> > then all the questions about is this the most pouplar one would go
> away).
> >
> > WHICH ONE FITS YOU NEEDS BEST BASED ON YOUR ANAYLSIS?
> >
> > (It's a bit like sayind what method call you you call in your code?
>
> > I'ts up to you).
> >
> > Alex Kravets wrote:
> >
> >> Ted, Graig,
> >> 've read some posts/blogs where people who've used Struts and now
> use
> >> Tapestry say that they will never go back to Struts again.
> >
> >
> > see above. If you have similar needs as them maybe you should do
> that.
> > In 2000, http://barracudamvc.org/Barracuda/index.html would say
> they
> > are better and Turbine did; there was allways competition.
> >
> >> Is this what Struts Shale tries to change/disprove?
> >
> >
> > I hope not!!!
> >
> > I feel like I am the old Lakers, #1, and everyone hates you. And
> yes,
> > I hate the Lakers. :-P
> >
> > .V
> >
> >
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
Posted by Alex Kravets <ak...@kligerweiss.com>.
Well I think 70% is a little bit too much
http://www.manageability.org/polls/what-is-the-best-java-web-framework
Accroding to latest "market share" reportring (by Raible) Struts is
like 70% of market share. (Having said that, I wish that people that use
Struts becuase it's popular go away, one should use own judgment; if
everyone used EJB, would you use that too? or would you jump of a
bridge? Waren Buffet has a book and a chapter on Lemmings)
But at the end of the day most people tend to learn
languages/platforms/frameworks that are in demand (remember when HTML
coders were payed $70K?). Most people will not spend time on learning
something that they think/know is good but the rest of the world does
not, because most people do what they do to support themselves
financially. The rest of does it because they are scientists.
Vic wrote:
> I know you asked Ted/Craig but Tapestry is a Apache project, like
> Struts, a good framework that is View centric, home page says: "
> Tapestry is an alternative to scripting environments such as
> JavaServer Pages or Velocity"
> Accroding to latest "market share" reportring (by Raible) Struts is
> like 70% of market share. (Having said that, I wish that people that
> use Struts becuase it's popular go away, one should use own judgment;
> if everyone used EJB, would you use that too? or would you jump of a
> bridge? Waren Buffet has a book and a chapter on Lemmings)
> Even if Struts loses 10% every year, that would make it say 5% or 3%,
> or.... 1% say in many years.
> Tapestry, JSF, WebWorks, Symphony, etc. are all fine comunities that
> have that kind of a market share, so it would not be bad at all. (and
> then all the questions about is this the most pouplar one would go away).
>
> WHICH ONE FITS YOU NEEDS BEST BASED ON YOUR ANAYLSIS?
>
> (It's a bit like sayind what method call you you call in your code?
> I'ts up to you).
>
> Alex Kravets wrote:
>
>> Ted, Graig,
>> 've read some posts/blogs where people who've used Struts and now use
>> Tapestry say that they will never go back to Struts again.
>
>
> see above. If you have similar needs as them maybe you should do that.
> In 2000, http://barracudamvc.org/Barracuda/index.html would say they
> are better and Turbine did; there was allways competition.
>
>> Is this what Struts Shale tries to change/disprove?
>
>
> I hope not!!!
>
> I feel like I am the old Lakers, #1, and everyone hates you. And yes,
> I hate the Lakers. :-P
>
> .V
>
>
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
Posted by Vic <vi...@friendvu.com>.
I know you asked Ted/Craig but Tapestry is a Apache project, like
Struts, a good framework that is View centric, home page says: "
Tapestry is an alternative to scripting environments such as JavaServer
Pages or Velocity"
Accroding to latest "market share" reportring (by Raible) Struts is like
70% of market share. (Having said that, I wish that people that use
Struts becuase it's popular go away, one should use own judgment; if
everyone used EJB, would you use that too? or would you jump of a
bridge? Waren Buffet has a book and a chapter on Lemmings)
Even if Struts loses 10% every year, that would make it say 5% or 3%,
or.... 1% say in many years.
Tapestry, JSF, WebWorks, Symphony, etc. are all fine comunities that
have that kind of a market share, so it would not be bad at all. (and
then all the questions about is this the most pouplar one would go away).
WHICH ONE FITS YOU NEEDS BEST BASED ON YOUR ANAYLSIS?
(It's a bit like sayind what method call you you call in your code? I'ts
up to you).
Alex Kravets wrote:
> Ted, Graig,
> 've read some posts/blogs where people who've used Struts and now use
> Tapestry say that they will never go back to Struts again.
see above. If you have similar needs as them maybe you should do that.
In 2000, http://barracudamvc.org/Barracuda/index.html would say they are
better and Turbine did; there was allways competition.
> Is this what Struts Shale tries to change/disprove?
I hope not!!!
I feel like I am the old Lakers, #1, and everyone hates you. And yes, I
hate the Lakers. :-P
.V
--
Forums, Boards, Blogs and News in RiA <http://www.boardVU.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
Posted by Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 13:31:28 -0500, Alex Kravets wrote:
>�Ted,
>
>�I hope you don't think that we (well me at least) seem to be
>�accusation in our e-mails. That is not the case. I am just sharing
>�my thoughts on where this or that approach might lead in the
>�future. It might sound unappreciative when guys spend thousands of
>�hours perfecting/making better something and other guys try to
>�critique it without knowing what labor was put into this work, but
>�that's the nature of users: bitch, bitch, bitch (I know it myself).
>�No hard feeling I hope :)
I just get confused when people seem to abscribe our motivations to economic or competitive forces.
It's not like that. We write stuff so that we can use it ourselves, and then share what we write with the group, who help us improve it.
Marketshare and capitalism have little or nothing to do with it.
Case in point. I'm doing a private class on Advanced Struts next week. Client put "alternatives to Struts" on the agenda. Since client is in Boston, I pinged Howard Lewis Ship, and he's going to do a session on Tapestry and Hivemind for us.
We're all friends here. :)
Of course, if choice is an issue for someone, there's always .NET/Mono. :)
But, I can tell you, even on a MS-dominanted platform, choice is rampant. It may not be as high-level as choosing between Struts or Tapestry, but it's there. And, as we continue to port Java-bred libraries, like iBATIS and Lucene, to .NET/Mono, more and more choice will rear its head.
Why is there choice?
Not because of capitalism or competition. There's no reason why we would want to "compete" with Tapestry or WebWorks. These frameworks are all free. There's little or no profit motive. Moreover, it's not hard to become a committer on an open source project if you are willing to do the work.
There's choice because writing applications is still way too much work, and we're still finding better ways to bang the rock together. Finding new ways means choosing between between them, at least until time and evolution have a chance to sort it all out.
Does anyone know the absolutely best way to to write an web application?
I hope not! Given how I still spend my days, I'm hoping we haven't invented it yet. :)
And, I wager by the time we do, years from now, someone will have reinvented the web, and we'll have to start all over again. :(
-Ted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
Posted by Alex Kravets <ak...@kligerweiss.com>.
Ted,
I hope you don't think that we (well me at least) seem to be accusation
in our e-mails. That is not the case. I am just sharing my thoughts on
where this or that approach might lead in the future. It might sound
unappreciative when guys spend thousands of hours perfecting/making
better something and other guys try to critique it without knowing what
labor was put into this work, but that's the nature of users: bitch,
bitch, bitch (I know it myself). No hard feeling I hope :)
Ted Husted wrote:
>I don't think anyone is out to prove or disprove anything.
>
>Craig saw a cool way to implement a front controller for JavaServer Faces, so he posted some proof-of-concept code. Other people starting making contributions. A community is growing up around the codebase, so we made it a subproject. That's really all there is to it.
>
>You know, guys, most of the committers are working stiffs, just like you. We find ways that help us write our own applications, and we share them with the community. We're not sitting around trying to come up with "The Next Big Thing" and move another million of copies of Struts. We're just trying to ship our next application, while we maintain the ones we already go, just like you.
>
>Craig thinks JSF and Shale is a great way to write Java Web applications, and other people are starting to agree with him. That's not to say there are not other great ways to write applications. Tapestry is one. Maverick, Spring MVC, and WebWorks are others.
>
>-Ted.
>
>On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 09:34:54 -0500, Alex Kravets wrote:
>
>
>> Ted, Graig,
>>
>> So was Struts Shale made to make programmer's life easier in
>> creating Web Applications using MVC Framework? I've read some
>> posts/blogs where people who've used Struts and now use Tapestry
>> say that they will never go back to Struts again. Is this what
>> Struts Shale tries to change/disprove?
>>
>> Ted Husted wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:03:09 -0500, Alex Kravets wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> So what do you guys think?
>>>> http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=31509
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> An important clarification we'll make to the FAQ is that "by
>>> doing our job right" we mean "not break backward compatibility"
>>> in the ongoing 1.x series.
>>>
>>> There's more than a few things that people want to do with Struts
>>> 1.x yet. We're approaching Struts 1.3, and already, the Milestone
>>> page [http://struts.apache.org/milestones.html] is looking
>>> forward to Struts 1.6.
>>>
>>> If need be, we can go on to Struts 1.42 or Struts 1.2025. If
>>> there's interest, there could be another five, ten, or fifty
>>> years of Struts 1.x development.
>>>
>>> A year ago, we talked about a Struts 2.x revolution to give us a
>>> clean start on the codebase. But, most everyone wanted to evolve
>>> the Struts 1.x codebase instead.
>>>
>>> So, that's what we are doing: evolving Struts 1.x, step by step,
>>> innovation by innovation, deprecation by deprecation :)
>>>
>>> If we never break backward compatibility, and we never start a
>>> new codebase, then we never need to roll the major version number.
>>>
>>> Meanwhile, another potentially great framework has come along:
>>> Shale. Like Struts, Shale is MVC web framework, but it doesn't
>>> share any code or architectural hallmarks with Struts 1.x. We
>>> could call it Struts 2.x, but we could also fork Maverick, Spring
>>> MVC, Tapestry, or WebWork and call any of those Struts 2.x, if
>>> that's what the community wanted.
>>>
>>> But, as near as we can tell, that's not what they community
>>> wants. The volunteers are showing by their commits that we want
>>> to evolve Struts 1.x and, at the same time, also work on Shale
>>> 1.x.
>>>
>>> As someone mentioned elsewhere: different strokes for different
>>> folks: different technologies for different requirements.
>>>
>>> People wanted to do both and proved it with their commits. So
>>> both is what we are doing :)
>>>
>>> And, if someone comes up with a third thing, based on dynamic
>>> ECMA Script or something, maybe we'll do that too. :)
>>>
>>> -Ted.
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> --- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
>
>
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
Posted by Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org>.
I don't think anyone is out to prove or disprove anything.
Craig saw a cool way to implement a front controller for JavaServer Faces, so he posted some proof-of-concept code. Other people starting making contributions. A community is growing up around the codebase, so we made it a subproject. That's really all there is to it.
You know, guys, most of the committers are working stiffs, just like you. We find ways that help us write our own applications, and we share them with the community. We're not sitting around trying to come up with "The Next Big Thing" and move another million of copies of Struts. We're just trying to ship our next application, while we maintain the ones we already go, just like you.
Craig thinks JSF and Shale is a great way to write Java Web applications, and other people are starting to agree with him. That's not to say there are not other great ways to write applications. Tapestry is one. Maverick, Spring MVC, and WebWorks are others.
-Ted.
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 09:34:54 -0500, Alex Kravets wrote:
>�Ted, Graig,
>
>�So was Struts Shale made to make programmer's life easier in
>�creating Web Applications using MVC Framework? I've read some
>�posts/blogs where people who've used Struts and now use Tapestry
>�say that they will never go back to Struts again. Is this what
>�Struts Shale tries to change/disprove?
>
>�Ted Husted wrote:
>
>>�On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:03:09 -0500, Alex Kravets wrote:
>>
>>
>>>�So what do you guys think?
>>>�http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=31509
>>>
>>>
>>�An important clarification we'll make to the FAQ is that "by
>>�doing our job right" we mean "not break backward compatibility"
>>�in the ongoing 1.x series.
>>
>>�There's more than a few things that people want to do with Struts
>>�1.x yet. We're approaching Struts 1.3, and already, the Milestone
>>�page [http://struts.apache.org/milestones.html] is looking
>>�forward to Struts 1.6.
>>
>>�If need be, we can go on to Struts 1.42 or Struts 1.2025. If
>>�there's interest, there could be another five, ten, or fifty
>>�years of Struts 1.x development.
>>
>>�A year ago, we talked about a Struts 2.x revolution to give us a
>>�clean start on the codebase. But, most everyone wanted to evolve
>>�the Struts 1.x codebase instead.
>>
>>�So, that's what we are doing: evolving Struts 1.x, step by step,
>>�innovation by innovation, deprecation by deprecation :)
>>
>>�If we never break backward compatibility, and we never start a
>>�new codebase, then we never need to roll the major version number.
>>
>>�Meanwhile, another potentially great framework has come along:
>>�Shale. Like Struts, Shale is MVC web framework, but it doesn't
>>�share any code or architectural hallmarks with Struts 1.x. We
>>�could call it Struts 2.x, but we could also fork Maverick, Spring
>>�MVC, Tapestry, or WebWork and call any of those Struts 2.x, if
>>�that's what the community wanted.
>>
>>�But, as near as we can tell, that's not what they community
>>�wants. The volunteers are showing by their commits that we want
>>�to evolve Struts 1.x and, at the same time, also work on Shale
>>�1.x.
>>
>>�As someone mentioned elsewhere: different strokes for different
>>�folks: different technologies for different requirements.
>>
>>�People wanted to do both and proved it with their commits. So
>>�both is what we are doing :)
>>
>>�And, if someone comes up with a third thing, based on dynamic
>>�ECMA Script or something, maybe we'll do that too. :)
>>
>>�-Ted.
>>
>>
>>�------------------------------------------------------------------
>>�--- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>�For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
Posted by Alex Kravets <ak...@kligerweiss.com>.
Ted, Graig,
So was Struts Shale made to make programmer's life easier in creating
Web Applications using MVC Framework? I've read some posts/blogs where
people who've used Struts and now use Tapestry say that they will never
go back to Struts again. Is this what Struts Shale tries to change/disprove?
Ted Husted wrote:
>On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:03:09 -0500, Alex Kravets wrote:
>
>
>> So what do you guys think?
>> http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=31509
>>
>>
>
>An important clarification we'll make to the FAQ is that "by doing our job right" we mean "not break backward compatibility" in the ongoing 1.x series.
>
>There's more than a few things that people want to do with Struts 1.x yet. We're approaching Struts 1.3, and already, the Milestone page [http://struts.apache.org/milestones.html] is looking forward to Struts 1.6.
>
>If need be, we can go on to Struts 1.42 or Struts 1.2025. If there's interest, there could be another five, ten, or fifty years of Struts 1.x development.
>
>A year ago, we talked about a Struts 2.x revolution to give us a clean start on the codebase. But, most everyone wanted to evolve the Struts 1.x codebase instead.
>
>So, that's what we are doing: evolving Struts 1.x, step by step, innovation by innovation, deprecation by deprecation :)
>
>If we never break backward compatibility, and we never start a new codebase, then we never need to roll the major version number.
>
>Meanwhile, another potentially great framework has come along: Shale. Like Struts, Shale is MVC web framework, but it doesn't share any code or architectural hallmarks with Struts 1.x. We could call it Struts 2.x, but we could also fork Maverick, Spring MVC, Tapestry, or WebWork and call any of those Struts 2.x, if that's what the community wanted.
>
>But, as near as we can tell, that's not what they community wants. The volunteers are showing by their commits that we want to evolve Struts 1.x and, at the same time, also work on Shale 1.x.
>
>As someone mentioned elsewhere: different strokes for different folks: different technologies for different requirements.
>
>People wanted to do both and proved it with their commits. So both is what we are doing :)
>
>And, if someone comes up with a third thing, based on dynamic ECMA Script or something, maybe we'll do that too. :)
>
>-Ted.
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
>
>
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
Posted by Vic <vi...@friendvu.com>.
Got it!
Don't worry, we learn quickly.
.V
Dakota Jack wrote:
><snip>
>Please don't respond to this email ..
>
>
--
Forums, Boards, Blogs and News in RiA <http://www.boardVU.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
Posted by Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org>.
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 08:04:16 -0800, Dakota Jack wrote:
>
>�Please don't respond to this email by saying that those who do can
>�do anything they like. �They can, of course, but that does not mean
>�it makes much sense except for marketing purposes for JSF. �(I
>�personally think that this will just confuse people to no end and
>�that before the tools that JSF is built to accommodate come out,
>�those who are expected to use it and are taregeted to do so will
>�have gone elsewhere. �We'll see.) �Struts-Shale is purely a market
>�ploy for Sun's JSF and has nothing to do with Struts other than the
>�Struts committers got "roped-a-doped".
This is just plain wrong.
There is more Struts 1.x development going on now than ever before.
Some people wanted to work on Shale as well as Struts 1.x, so we opened a subproject.
No big woof.
What people either fail or refuse to recognize is that the ASF is an *non-profit* organization. We can't "market" anything. We provide services to the community for the greater good.
It's not about competition, and it's not about marketing. It's about community service. It's about volunteers contributing to the project.
People are volunteering to work on Struts 1.x, and people are also volunteering to work on Shale 1.x.
So that's what we are doing: Struts 1.x and Shale 1.x.
Again, no big woof.
One developer's confusion is another developer's choice.
Choice is good.
-Ted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts 2.0 or Struts 0.0? [or Struts 1.42?]
Posted by Dakota Jack <da...@gmail.com>.
<snip>
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 06:50:13 -0500, Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
> Meanwhile, another potentially great framework has come along: Shale. Like Struts, Shale is MVC web framework, but it doesn't share any code or architectural hallmarks with Struts 1.x.
</ship>
As Rod Johnson (the brrains behind Spring) says:
"Do not try to combine approaches that do not naturally fit. Struts
is at its core concerned with request-driven web MVC, while JSF is
focused on page-centric RAD with per event action listeners. Both
approaches have merit, but trying to combine them does not add much
value except for interim solutions when migrating from one to the
other."
Please don't respond to this email by saying that those who do can do
anything they like. They can, of course, but that does not mean it
makes much sense except for marketing purposes for JSF. (I personally
think that this will just confuse people to no end and that before the
tools that JSF is built to accommodate come out, those who are
expected to use it and are taregeted to do so will have gone
elsewhere. We'll see.) Struts-Shale is purely a market ploy for
Sun's JSF and has nothing to do with Struts other than the Struts
committers got "roped-a-doped". However, if the Struts community has
had a failure of nerve in the marketplace of controller based MVC
frameworks and no longer wishes to seriously compete in this area
(ceding with Craig that other MVC frameworks are superior) but merely
to take care of the old product, this probably does not matter. If
Ted is abandoning Jericho, then the place to develop Struts-like
frameworks is probably elsewhere, in my opinion. And, despite
pressure the the contrary, I am entitled to my opinion. It will be
interesting to see what happens down the road.
As Rod Johnson also says:
"Newer JSF early access releases seem to address everything that
Struts does in terms of action and form handling, rendering Struts-JSF
integration little use except for migration-path and marketing
purposes."
If Struts is not going to develop but rather is merely going to give
its name to JSF and keep doing what it is doing in the 1.x series,
abandoning any idea of "web-modernity" as in Jericho, then I am soon
off to another (as Craig says) superior true MVC framework like
Spring. I hope this does not create a rash of silly and personal
responses as it usually does.
I do have a serious question which I hope can be answered with out all
the bile that is typical in this area. How is JSF or Shale MVC?
Where is the C? I know that this is called a "View Controller", etc.
But, that is just another 1984ish use of a word, isn't it? The point
of MVC is that the architecture *separates* the M, the V and C, but in
Shale or JSF there is only an M and a V, aren't there?
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
"Heaven has changed. The Sky now goes all the way to our feet.
~Dakota Jack~
"This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the
addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based
on this message or any information herein. If you have received this
message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail
and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org