No On 8/15/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hmm... I'm just about to post a reply to that entry. Basically, I feel > that although JSF itself can be great view-tier technology, it isn't > really a full replacement for Struts. JSF+Shale *is* a replacement for > Struts, but I think that's a point which is often lost. An interesting > thing about Struts Ti is that it would treat JSF as a first-class view > tier without depending on it for anything else. That may or may not > turn out to be important, but it does keep JSF as a peer to other view > technologies, rather than at the core. > > I don't think JSF and Struts are incompatible, as long as JSF is being > used as a (powerful) view. Intra-page event handling works fine with > something like Struts. When the other more general-framework-type > functionality is used, there's a conflict. > > In general, I agree with the sentiment that there's a lot of hype in > this arena, and not all of it is easily backed up. But the Struts > community has always been a bit hype-adverse, no? > > Rich > > Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > > >FYI > > > >http://jroller.com/page/dgeary > > > > > > > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Frank W. Zammetti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 8:44 AM > >>To: Struts Developers List > >>Subject: Re: JSF vs. Struts > >> > >> > >>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] > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >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] > >
-- "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]
