While I find this very interesting, I'm concerned that you are creating yet another MVC framework project. We already have Struts, Turbine, Maverick, WebWork and JPublish to name a few. I do agree that there several things mentioned are needed to be improved with the current approach, such as more support for RAD development. I find adding a more complex event model that you mention and new scope are also very interesting. But shouldn't these be suggested to the Struts folks? Would it not be better to help improve Struts instead of creating a new approach? Why tie the approach to specific data model? jDAO has its own project, so it should not be part of this project. The event model you mention appears to exist to some degree within Turbine. I think we should investigate Turbine, Maverick, and WebWork instead of creating something new. At worst, you'll have new suggestion to add to Struts via your project and the other MVCs.
I appreciate that this is a sample application. I am eager to look over the source code. Could this not be offered to the Struts team to include in the examples directory? The new features offered to the Struts framework as suggestions for version 2? My concern is that the Java Open Source community is very Not Invented Here! Look at how many template engines exist? How many MVC frameworks exist? I feel that by creating new tool after new tool has fragmented the server-side development. In the process, we have not provided one single excellent solution to developers. Instead, we keep creating mediocre solutions. My fear is that this will only confuse and muddy the waters more. It will recieve little attention outside readers of this list. Whereas, if we worked within the Struts project, there would good chance for this to become the new standard. I'm not sure what others feel, but I just want to add my two cents in... Regards, Jeff Duska _______________________________________________ MVC-Programmers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.basebeans.com:8081/mailman/listinfo/mvc-programmers