I would have to say +1 to this - Hani has summarised it exactly. There are many fools on IRC, and as they say a lot - very little of it is useful, most of it is utter crap. Ignore them.
I for one don't see why we can't all work together to build a better framework, rather than splintering all the time. As Patrick said, we're in some sort of discussion-design-paralysis at the moment. He who does, wins. Just build it and they will use it - people will always argue on a mailing list, whether they will actually build it themselves is something totally different. Please reconsider from me too. -mike On 5/1/03 3:50 AM, "Hani Suleiman" ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) penned the words: > Noooo! > > The discussion on here has been VERY pleasant to see, a lot of smart > things said and I felt that real progress was being made. Please ignore > the idiots on IRC. It's a little boys club where if you don't want to > play with them they pout and sulk. Don't make the mistake of assuming > that those who are loudest are the majority. Don't be discouraged by > the whiny tone of IRC, if you're unhappy in that medium, then avoid it. > You wouldn't be the first highly able and competent developer to choose > to not play with those kids. > > Please reconsider your decision, and take up the task of xwork > architecture once again! > > On Saturday, January 4, 2003, at 10:57 AM, Rickard Öberg wrote: > >> All, >> >> After having read all comments on the changes I wanted to make, as >> well as some not-so-nice comments by people on #java (boxed and Joe >> Ottinger for example), I've decided that it's not a good idea for me >> to be architecting XWork. It seems I and most of you have rather >> different requirements for what such a framework should contain, and >> how it would work. Thus, trying to make a framework which fits both >> worlds is just too much pain. >> >> So, I'm resigning from the position as architect of XWork. If noone >> else is interested I'd suggest that Pat resume his work. >> >> I'll probably start working on another framework instead, but which >> would be totally geared towards the upcoming Portlet API. AFAICT >> portlets is going to become a very nice way to build web components >> and pluggable web apps in the coming year, so I see little reason for >> me to work on a non-portlet approach. >> >> Good luck! >> >> regards, >> Rickard >> >> -- >> Rickard Öberg >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Senselogic >> >> Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek >> Welcome to geek heaven. >> http://thinkgeek.com/sf >> _______________________________________________ >> Opensymphony-webwork mailing list >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
