On 6/21/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paul Benedict wrote:
> I don't see the point in bundling Shale into a "Struts 2.0" distribution. No
> offense to anyone who develops Shale, but when we have packages called
> "action2", it makes it pretty clear Shale is not Struts 2.0 -- only the action
> framework. Separate frameworks, imo, get different names and distributions. I
am
> not offended Shale is within the Struts community, but I do not see it as the
> torch bearer to the name Struts -- I do see that with the AF, which
historically
> holds the name.
Again, Struts Action and Struts Shale would both retain their separate projects,
codebases, and release cycles. Struts 2.0 is about building something on top of
our Struts efforts to create a unified front to users. Users don't care about
all the little projects, subprojects, and libraries we have; I think they just
want something to help them build webapps - they want Struts 2.0. And as a
committer, PMC member and Struts user, I want it too.
Making a following analogy
SAF1 ~ Win16 API
SAF2 ~ Win32 API
JSF ~ .Net
Shale ~ WinFX
I see how WinFX enhances .Net, and how .Net works together with Win32
talking to each other as well as to the same core API. But I do no see
how WinFX can be a part of Win32 or why it should be shipped with
Win32. Unless, of course, everything is bundled together in one huge
lump of code.
On another note: I hope that SAF1 has not reached WinMe stage, and is
still somewhere along Win98 lines ;-)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
