I think that most everyone would agree that exploration is a very good thing. At least I have not run into the people who take the opposite stand.
Unfortunately, I think there is a definite disconnect between market forces and what is the best product. This is particularly true with the computer industry, in my experience. Market forces include hype, and if you want the industry to do well, you are certainly obligated to meet hype with hype. The next email in this thread references an individual's thoughts on JSF versus other options. This reference leaves out stuff that is more than relevant. That is how it works. JSF is struggling, so they are playing hardball at the top. I think that is okay. I can play in that ballpark. I wish so many people were not toadies though and would participate instead of choosing a leader for themselves. However, exploration is great. Wonnderful, wonnderful! I don't think that there is that much to computer programming. It really is not rocket science. And, I don't think the advances have been that great in the last five years, except in the market place. I have used at least five different frameworks equal to or better than Struts and certainly better than JSF before five years ago. I think we do not see often how much there is out there in companies that do not use open source. On 8/10/05, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I personally think all this exploration is a Very Good Thing(tm). There > are a vast number of different ideas out there as to how a modern > application framework should be built. Mistakes have been made over the > years, lessons have been learned, but we don't all agree on what the > mistakes were or what the lessons are! If that sounds bad to anyone, it > isn't. It's quite the opposite and is the only way healthy debate and > ultimately progress is made. > > At some point we're going to have to all weed out the options that don't > quite measure up, and that will happen via simple market forces (the > market in this case being mostly developer mind share), but I don't > think that time is now, so the more experimentation, the better. > > I for one am not willing to declare one thing better than another... I > regret having done that in the past prematurely, and certainly not in a > manner I'm especially proud of. So, I'm certainly not going to make the > same mistake twice. > > I'm still not sold on JSF, that much has not changed. I do however > think there is some decent ideas underpinning it, which is also the case > for many of the other frameworks and approaches out there, so declaring > JSF or anything else for that matter a failure now is probably not fair > either. I do think Jack's point about JSF being around for a while and > not really setting the world on fire is fair, although that doesn't mean > it has failed, just that it's going a little slower than hoped. My take > on JSF is simply this: we'll see. I'm not sold yet, but I'm not willing > to say I never will be. > > As for Shale, I'm not sure I understand why Rod or anyone says that > Struts and JSF are not compatible... if the thinking is that the result > will be quite a bit different from Struts as we know it today, then I > suppose he might be right. That to me doesn't make them incompatible > though. From what I have seen of JSF, and what I know of Struts, I can > conceive of ways they could be fit together. I haven't had a chance to > get into Shale yet, but I have no doubt many of those ideas, and many > more I haven't thought of, are present. Why they are incompatible I > just don't get, and I don't care who is making the claim, no matter how > well-respected they are, I need to see some real, concrete examples > before I'm convinced. > > Struts Ti looks pretty interesting... many of the ideas that were > described here a few days ago were quite good in my mind. Should it be > the future of Struts? I don't know yet, and I'm not even sure those > developing it would be willing to say that at this juncture. It's > another possible path, another exploration of possibilities, and that's > good. > > One thing is for sure: most of us look back on the way we developed > applications just five years ago and wonder why we ever did things that > way. I have absolutely no doubt we'll be doing the same thing in > another five years. I too would like to see less hype sometimes, but > promoting ones' ideas is human nature. If you think you have a > compelling answer, or even the One True Answer, you tell people about it > and try and convince them. That's hype. It may not always be helpful, > but it's perfectly natural :) > > Frank > > Dakota Jack wrote: > > I have to agree personally with Rod Johnson "J2EE without EJBs", > > Spring framework architect, etc., when he says that Shale is merely a > > stopgap and that Struts as we know it is simply incompatible with JSF. > > That seems fairly obvious and I find it hard to believe that anyone > > familiar with the issues would think any differently. I personally > > would not hire anyone would thought differently, whether they like JSF > > or not. > > > > JSF is not new. JSF has been around forever, so it cannot be the > > cutting edge. If it is cutting, it is the "cutting middle" and almost > > the "cutting tailend". The JSF idea has been around even longer with > > all sorts of frameworks which I personally think do it better. > > Indeed, I think it fair to say that one of the main architects of the > > JSF framework has said as much but has to feed his family. > > > > Certainly, if you like JSF, knock yourself out. Love it to death. I > > don't care. I only care about giving people that ask a fair > > evaluation of the product without the hype. > > > > On 8/10/05, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>Quick correction: Struts is _not_ forking in any sense of the word. > >>Struts Ti is a sandbox project several of us are working on as an > >>exploration of a simplified framework more like Ruby on Rails than > >>JSF. It has not been accepted as a Struts subproject, just as Shale > >>has not been accepted as "Struts 2.0". > >> > >>The Struts project is currently in, what I would call, a state of > >>exploration. In addition to Shale and Ti, there are other projects > >>like Struts Overdrive, Struts Flow, etc., which are also exploring > >>different aspects of web development. Of course, there will be Struts > >>classic still for a long time to come which will continue to forego > >>active development. > >> > >>I think Struts is realizing there is no "one way" when it comes to web > >>development. If a particular project or approach interests you, join > >>in. Personally, I think shale will be a great success building on the > >>strong JSF framework, and if it meets your needs, give it a shot. > >>Just as not every web application is the same, neither is their needs > >>for a framework. > >> > >>Don > >> > >>On 8/10/05, James Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>>Those of you on the Struts Developers list. Would you like to comment on > >>>this? > >>> > >>> > >>>-- > >>>James Mitchell > >>>Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist > >>>Consulting / Mentoring / Freelance > >>>EdgeTech, Inc. > >>>http://www.edgetechservices.net/ > >>>678.910.8017 > >>>AIM: jmitchtx > >>>MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>Skype: jmitchtx > >>> > >>>----- Original Message ----- > >>>From: "Matthias Wessendorf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>To: "MyFaces Discussion" <users@myfaces.apache.org>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 7:29 AM > >>>Subject: Re: JSF vs. Struts > >>> > >>> > >>>currently the are *forking* :) > >>> > >>>Struts Ti > >>> > >>>see here: > >>>http://www.opensubscriber.com/message/dev@struts.apache.org/1854691.html > >>> > >>>and Shale (aka Struts 2.0) is build on top of JSF. > >>> > >>>It is a framework for JSF ... > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>On 8/10/05, Werner Punz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>>>Doing both, I only can recommend, if you can omit struts and go > >>>>directly for MyFaces (not the JSF RI, it lacks severely) > >>>> > >>>>Struts feels somewhat dated in many areas compared to JSF. > >>>> > >>>>Werner > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>Aleksei Valikov wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>Hi. > >>>>> > >>>>>Could anyone post a good link on Struts vs. JSF comparison? I have a > >>>>>meeting in 40 minutes where I need to push through my decision on using > >>>>>JSF for a large project (GIS/Map Viewers). Seems like I can argument my > >>>>>decision, but some additional support material would be helpful. > >>>>> > >>>>>Thanks in advance. > >>>>> > >>>>>Bye. > >>>>>/lexi > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>>-- > >>>Matthias Wessendorf > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>> > >> > >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Frank W. Zammetti > Founder and Chief Software Architect > Omnytex Technologies > http://www.omnytex.com > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
