On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 4:20 AM, dusty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So the more I think about it the more thoughts I have.... > > The major users like Atlassian and Google forked Webwork a while ago I think > and they don't run their stuff off the Struts2 code base. Don has been > awesome for Struts2, but I don't know if there are any other commiters from > Atlassian or Google. Alexandru uses Webwork for InfoQ, and I am not sure if > he ever moved to Struts2 either. I am not sure what Patrick and Jason are > doing these days but we have a large population of WebWork people that seem > to have not moved to the Struts side of the world. I don't know if that > matters or not. As long as we have enough smart people, and we do, to keep > things going in the right direction. And as long as there is interest and > growing adoption.... > > So we get more aggressive with our releases. We definitely want to preserve > compatibility but if we have a good reason for breaking compatibility we let > people know and show them how to migrate. At the same time we get more > aggressive with marketing, by overhauling the website, getting the project > blog going, re-organizing the wiki and documentation, getting the source > available from Fisheye, maybe even start a conference. Everything but the > conference part seems pretty doable. > > Don has been a kind of de-facto leader for the project. I wonder what he is > thinking..... >
Allow me to jump in for a moment with some more info. It's true that most WW devs are not active (anymore) these days. I blame it on too much work and shifting priorities. Alex is working on InfoQ, TestNG, Groovy (and probably a dozen other things), Toby returned to WW because he needed that one for his projects, but being one guy, it's hard to pull off releases .. unless you're Rainer, which has been taking care of XW, but judging by the way his commits drop in, I think he's just way too busy (pretty much like Rene). Patrick has only recently 'revived' after some things that required some other commitment ;-), Jason is just vanished from the earth afaik, and everyone else is either MIA or just too busy. Ian also has other commitments and probably won't have much sleep at all for the next 6 months ;-) S2 holds its ground against other web frameworks - the code you can write with it is very elegant, very concise and S2 is extremely flexible. New developers can get up to speed really quick (but some guidance is needed for those coming from S1). The documentation is perhaps a bit shattered (and the automatic static publishing doesn't work correctly, afaict) and outdated in some places, but like most habits it's quite hard to see the problem zones after all these years. Personally, my only gripe is OGNL which kills performance when using S2 tags in a heavily concurrent environment - but for most projects, it's fast enough. Like I stated before, I've begun MVEL integration a few weeks ago, but lack of spare time has halted that one for now. Again. Some points: - XWork: integrate it into S2. - OGNL: drop or at least provide alternate implementation using MVEL. - REST: I agree, we need that. - COC: No real need for it, it helps at first, but that makes a 0.1% difference, which I'll happily sacrifice for increased readability in my struts-*.xml files. Never understood the whole XML verbosity problem. S2 plugin for IntelliJ helps here though, so I might be biased. - Ajax: throw out Dojo and either replace it with JQuery or another lightweight JS library, or drop Ajax themes completely and rely on 3rd party plugins. - Lower level customization documentation: would be nice, but normally, if you're going to dive into those, you're smart enough to read the source code and figure things out yourself. Entry level documentation (like the screencasts and best practices) would have a bigger impact. - Portlets: seems like only Nils is working on those, but quite a few people seem to use it. I've never used it, but personally I think it's a great testimony for the flexibility of S2. - Documentation: no more (example) documentation in the Javadocs so non-committers can make changes in the wiki. My 2 cents. Phil > > > Jeromy Evans - Blue Sky Minds wrote: >> >> I share similar sentiment. Whenever I take a critical look as to whether >> to use struts2 I keep coming back to the conclusion that it's >> fundamentally sound as far as java frameworks go. >> I'd categorize the problem as not enough generals. Most of us can make >> incremental improvements or start new plugins but few have the courage >> to to drive through fundamental changes or remove features. I'd join >> some kind of coordinated hack-a-thon to break through the inertia. >> >> My #1 issue is that it's *too difficult and time-consuming to create a >> release* on the 2.1 trunk. If releases are difficult and dependent on a >> few key individuals then momentum slows and the project inevitably stalls. >> >> I've been independently tinkering with release process to try to >> automate all assembly within a CI system so a formal release is an >> administrative process only, but it's not much fun. >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Concerned-Strutszien%3A-A-Manifesto-tp20053620p20102920.html > Sent from the Struts - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- "We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand." - Randy Pausch --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
