+1 Ted, I'm with you 100%. James Mitchell and Bill Siggelkow have been preaching to me about Rails for 6 months now and I have finally taken the time to dig in deeper. And they are right! It has some amazing concepts. I can't wait to see how we can evolve Struts towards achieving some of the excellent concepts implemented in Rails.
james On Mon Sep 10 9:55 , 'Ted Husted' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent: >I'm on board with Don's direction, and I'd like to try doing a >ReSTful, Zero-Configuration, Code Behind MailReader this week, based >on Brian's SmartURLs plugin, which is putting it all together in a >single package. > >I believe the key point is that we have to develop architectures and >coding paradigms that let us "say it once". A very good way to say it >once is to say it with naming conventions, and to say it the URI. (And >when that doesn't work, annotations!) > >Many of us are already use conventions and packed URIs, we just >haven't been telling the *framework* enough about our conventions so >that it could follow along on its own. > >Personally, I don't see this as a move away from the WebWork or Struts >coding styles, but a natural progression. (Code-behind is wildcards >without the wildcards.) We've been trying to write applications this >way all along. We just couldn't see the architectural forest through >the XML-strewn trees. :) > >-Ted. > >On 9/8/07, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Personally, I think we have a lot to learn from rails as they play >> very well off the strengths of the action-based Model2 architecture. >> Action-based frameworks strengths: >> * Simple workflow as in URL -> Action -> View >> * Intuitive (using conventions) URL -> Action mappings >> * RESTful by being close the the HTTP protocol >> * Scalable by not storing view state on the server >> * Lightweight in terms of code size and concepts needed to master >> >> As our goal is to make developing scalable applications easier and >> quicker, I think we have a lot to learn from rails. I hope to spend >> some time beefing up the RESTful aspects of Struts 2 both for web >> services and for regular HTML-based applications. You are right in >> that there are a lot of options in Struts 2, and we need to do a >> better job of providing a simple front to Struts 2 that doesn't >> bombard you with all its options and features. >> >> As the web moves to embrace more and more Ajax and web service >> functionality, I think Struts 2 and its action-based architecture will >> be well-suited to meet those needs. If you want to drop components on >> a page, obviously Struts 2 isn't for you, but if you want a framework >> on which to build a scalable, public-facing web application supporting >> mobile, web service, and Ajax clients, I hope Struts 2 will be the >> logical choise. >> >> Don >> >> >> >> On 9/9/07, Tom Schneider [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Don Brown wrote: >> > > Right, and that's why I didn't move to kill it off for 2.1. Give it >> > > some time, let the feature get some exercise, then if all agree, we >> > > could change the default later. As with any new feature, I'd put it >> > > in a sort of experimental category for at least one major release. >> > > >> > So, do you have a final goal in mind for this or are you just working to >> > open up options? I'd be very interested in hearing of the any options >> > we have. Are we moving more towards Rails, or are there other better >> > alternatives? > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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]
