That all sounds good Ted, thanks for writing this! Just to be clear,
*anyone* can write such a proposal and call for a vote, it doesn't have
to be a committer or PMC member, correct? I understand only those
people can cast binding votes (which would be ironic: the proposal
writer couldn't cast a binding vote for their own proposal!), but anyone
can make such a proposal, correct? If that is so, would it make sense
to announce it on the @user list as well, so that as many non-binding
votes could be cast as there is interest?
Thanks again Ted, assuming anyone can make such a proposal, I think this
is an excellent post and I for one very much appreciate it!
Frank
Ted Husted wrote:
In the midst of a recent mosh-pit thread, someone asked "What can I
do to change the direction of the Apache Struts project?"
The answer would be to summarize the concerns raised in the thread and
create a coherent proposal that lays out another course. (An obvious
place to do that would be the Apache Struts wiki.) When ready, call
for a vote on dev@ as to the proposal.
That's how directions like Shale and WebWork/Action2 were set, and if
anyone wanted to change these directions, simply follow the same
protocol.
Now, I should note that the binding votes on the Shale subproject and
WebWork/Action2 proposals were unanimous, with no dissents or waffling
by PMC members. To succeed, a proposal for an alternative direction
would need to be compelling.
Of course, if someone felt the Apache Struts PMC was being
unreasonable, intransient, and insular, or has otherwise become a
roadblock to innovation, then someone could appeal to the ASF Board of
Directors. The PMC serves at the pleasure of the board, and the board
can retire or reconstitute the PMC as it sees fit. For more about how
the ASF works, see
* http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
Though, right now, the method behind our madness goes something like this:
* Both the ASF and Apache Struts are standard-bearers, and, like it or
not, JSF is a designated Java standard. Given volunteers, we believe
that it is appropriate that Apache Struts provide JSF developers with
a MVC framework to fill in the gaps left by JSR 127, just like Struts
Action fills in the gaps left by the servlet platform
* The original Struts Action codebase suffers from design deficiencies
that would take some effort to remedy. Since neither the ASF nor
Apache Struts advocates "Not Invented Here Syndrome", we chose to
adopt WebWork as Struts Action 2 -- much the same way that tens of
thousands of teams adopted Struts Action over a homebrew framework.
* Struts Action 1 has a significant installed base, and so long as
there are volunteers to do the work, the codebase will remain open for
improvement, in the Apache Way.
It's no coincidence that these three bullets represent the three
options every Java engineer faces today:
* Do we try JSF?
* Do we try a second-generation framework?
* Do we stay the course?
Since we are working engineers, with day jobs at which we write real
applications, we are providing our own alternative to each option.
Is that good marketing? I really don't know. I didn't come here for
the marketing, I came here for the engineering. The marketing I'll
leave to the likes of IBM, Microsoft, Sun, and Zend.
-Ted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
AIM: fzammetti
Yahoo: fzammetti
MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Java Web Parts -
http://javawebparts.sourceforge.net
Supplying the wheel, so you don't have to reinvent it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
