On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:27 AM, James Holmes <ja...@jamesholmes.com>wrote:
> +1 and agree with Dave on moving the Dojo stuff into a plugin that is > hosted > somewhere else and can be maintained by more people. I'm fine with deprecating it, but I'm not in favour of just dumping it at Google Code in the hope that someone will show up who wants to work on it. I'd prefer to encourage someone who does actually want to work on it to make that move if they so choose. Creating a Google Code project that is essentially still-born doesn't make sense to me. -- Martin Cooper > > > On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Dave Newton <newton.d...@yahoo.com> > wrote: > > > --- On Sat, 12/20/08, Musachy Barroso wrote: > > > We have talked about this Ad nauseam, and it is obvious that > > > we don't have anyone willing to fix all the current bugs, > > > upgrade the Dojo plugin, or write a replacement. 2.1 is > > > around the corner and I think we should let users know > > > that the Dojo plugin won't be maintained anymore. > > > So my proposal is to deprecate it at once. > > > > +1 > > > > I wonder if the plugin was on Google/etc. if more people would work on it > > or try to upgrade the Dojo version? There's enough code in there that > makes > > me think a straight conversion to Dojo 1.0 is non-trivial, but I haven't > > looked at it in awhile. > > > > I know I don't know enough Dojo to be very helpful, and my own needs > aren't > > related to Dojo, although I still think a common interface into multiple > > Ajax/etc. implementations would be a good idea and would help with that > > aspect of things. > > > > Dave > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@struts.apache.org > > > > >
