On 4/26/06, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If that IS the case, I'd like to suggest that there be three separate > projects under Struts. If Action1 were allowed to be a separate project > under Struts, and maybe we call it Struts Classic (I was against this name > some time ago, but I think it makes sense now), I think there would be a > lot less anxiety out there about its fate. It could continue to evolve on > its own, and people could target their contributions to one or the other.
AFAIK, everyone on the PMC would like to see Action1 continue to grow and evolve. Many of us still have Action1 applications in production, and we might like to be able to do some work on them without migrating to Action 2.x or Shale. Though, right now, it seems clear that most of the committers plan to spend their volunteer hours working on Action2 or Shale. Action1 doesn't need to be considered a separate framework. We did that with Shale because the migration to JSF is jarring. But, the migration to Action2 is a much smoother transition. It is a transition, just as moving from Maven1 to Maven2 is a transition, but the learning curve is gentle, and even "refreshing". To me, it's clear that Action2 is a more highly evolved form of Action1. If there's an Action1 community willing to do the work, what we need to see is people doing the same thing for Action1 that CrazyBob started for Action2. If people are interested in moving forward, let's see the "rough spots" wiki page for Action1. Then, let's see the patches to make it happen. -Ted. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
