On 4/21/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 4/21/06, Nathan Bubna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Do we need to be discussing this now? I kinda feel like this should > > wait until Tiles is ready to stand alone. > > In another thread, Don pointed out that we need to be more forthcoming > with the project's roadmap. Right now, the Tiles roadmap is not clear > to me. I thought our intention was to propose it as a subproject, but > people have gradually come to speak of it as a Struts subproject. > > > If there is sufficient interest/support from developers, then i don't > > see any problem with having Tiles be a top level project. But to be > > honest, i don't think we have that at this, or if we do, then it is a > > surprise to me. And i'll point the finger at myself on that one too. > > The time i have available for open source work is very limited lately > > and Velocity is my priority there. I'd like to jump in and help with > > Tiles, but the time isn't there. > > We need the same level of support for Tiles regardless of whether it > is TLP or a subproject. If Tiles has become a one-developer show, then > we have deeper problems that we need to fix now. > > > Right now, it is easier for me to envision Tiles staying on as a > > Struts subproject. As for jumping over to Jakarta, that wouldn't > > bother me, but i'm not sure i understand why. Just because it's not a > > full framework on the level of Struts 1.x, Shale, and SAF 2? That's > > not a reason that motivates me a lot. > > Shale does for JSF what Action does for JSP
No, not at all. Certainly Shale builds on top of JSF, but Action building on top of JSP? Hardly. Sure, we have some tag libraries, but the real focus of Action has nothing to do with JSP. , and I believe it make > sense to develop it here. Eventually, we may find a way to merge > Action and Shale back together again, but for now, no one has figured > out a way to do that. But, we may yet. I'm honestly not sure why anyone would want to merge Action and Shale. They provide different models for building web applications. Mixing those would be a little odd, IMHO. On the other hand, I can certainly see sharing some code across the two. Standalone Tiles is not dependant on either Shale or Action. Tiles is > a component that they both *can* use, the same way they both use > BeanUtils. Again, this analogy doesn't work. If you pulled BeanUtils out of Struts, a lot of what's left would just fall flat on its face. That's not the case if you pull out Tiles, especially if you're not using JSP in the first place. When we extracted all the other components, we gave them > lives of their own in the Commons. We should pay Tiles the same > courtesy. OK, this part I agree with. :-) But I don't think a TLP is the right place. -- Martin Cooper -Ted. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >