Amen (great point abot JMS, btw)! This is _sandbox_, PLEASE everyone stop making things so dramatic. All I'm doing is putting things in there for us to discuss and toy with. Then we talk. That's the idea: Write, talk, write some more. Not write, talk, abandon project ;)
-Pat ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason Carreira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 11:04 AM Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] Reflection > I'm not sure I see the disconnect here. What's so different about Xwork? Views can still be JSP / Velocity / XSLT which generates HTML. It's still a great framework for web app development. If the ThreadLocal thing is the only sticking point, then lets talk about that. I'm personally for the changes Patrick made, as I think it makes the framework much more flexible. For instance, you could queue actions using JMS with all of the context (the ActionInvocation, or whatever Patrick has named it) carried along. However, that said, if it's such a big deal that people are talking about forking the code base and splitting Xwork and Webwork, then I think we should roll it back and discuss. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: matt baldree [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 10:18 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection > > > > > > I think there are two directions here and I don't see any > > easy resolution at this stage. So, yes I think two projects > > make sense. My next question is "Is there room for these two > > projects at OS?" Does it make sense or will it be a > > distraction since they do have overlap? Should WW move back > > out on its own? > > > > -Matt > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Rickard Öberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 7:24 AM > > Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection > > > > > > Erik Beeson wrote: > > > Rickard, as I understood, XWork was to break away from J2EE, hence > > > removing "web" from the name. If new versions with strong > > web ties are > > > going to remain, shouldn't they remain under the original WebWork > > > name? > > > > That is something I wanted to gauge by my last couple of > > emails. I personally do not believe (at this point) that > > making the web part "optional" is going to work very well. I > > certainly don't believe that it is going to be feasible, or > > even a good idea, to make a framework that allows code to be > > written for both Swing and the web. They're different beasts > > with different requirements, with completely different > > thinking behind how code gets written. We have a lot of Swing > > code in our project, and when I look at it I simply don't see > > how something like XWork would fit in, or why it would be useful. > > > > What *is* useful is to allow actions to be called without a > > servlet environment, but more or less *only* for > > testing/debugging purposes. Executing actions as a response > > to asynchronous messages could work too. But that's about it. > > I do not believe that actions (except for maybe 1% of special > > cases) can be reused in so different spaces. I remain open to > > the *possibility* of it, but so far I just haven't seen it. > > > > So, given all of this, my resignation from XWork still holds. > > The requirements that have been voiced the last few days are > > not mine, and I don't think they're compatible with my goals, > > at least not without serious compromises that will only hurt > > the end result. The question then becomes: would it be useful > > to do *both* XWork and WebWork, but as separate projects with > > these different goals? > > > > /Rickard > > > > -- > > Rickard Öberg > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Senselogic > > > > Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld =omething 2 > > See! http://www.vasoftware.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something > > 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld http://www.vasoftware.com > _______________________________________________ > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
