This is the same thing except giving the real problem, JSF force fit into
Struts, more importance. This intensifies rather than solves the problem.
Action and JSF are two different web frameworks. That is the bottom line.
Adroit talk, fancy speeches, etc., cannot change that and only serve to
di
These are not "camps" of a framework but competing frameworks. That is the
bottom line. Struts is dying and you guys, Gary, are killing it. Why not
man up and get your own space and try to survive on your own?
On 6/21/06, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>From: "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL P
I laughed when you were made a committer, Michael. That convinced me that
the end was inevitable. However, this I don't find at all funny. I really
would like to see Struts succeed.
On 6/20/06, Michael Jouravlev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/20/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As
Why in the world cannot you people see that JSF just does not fit? Is it
impossible to accept the truth? Would Craig be too angry?
On 6/20/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, it would be helpful to find a good way to make JSF easier to use
in a conventional Action-based application
That's right. The problem is the presence of any and all JSF hacks.
On 6/21/06, Alexandru Popescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi everybody!
I've read this thread a couple of times, because I was having a
somehow weird sentiment while doing it. Now, I think I have figured it
out :-). So, please
Struts is not advocating a preference? The Orwellian Speak continues.
Struts is Action. Struts is NOT JSF. Struts does not have a preference
because Struts IS one of the alternatives and one of the alternatives is NOT
Struts. I get a kick out of Don calling people willing to state that the
kin
( I send this off list - I hate struts flamewars )
Jack,
you are saying right things to people who fail
to understand them...
Struts was already brain-dead in 2001, and they
will fail to assimilate webwork properly.
(I will be first in line to fork it or apply to
comimter status at opensym
Heh, I have an idea, since JSF is so independent, why don't you start an
open source project for JSF? Then we could see if people really want it and
we could begin to tell what in the h -- e -- l -- l is going on with
Struts.
On 6/21/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The short an
Finally!
On 6/21/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/21/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If that means a (hopefully amicable) divorce, then so be it.
If that's what the people working on Shale want, I doubt that the PMC
would oppose a change of venue.
If that is th
You cannot marry a pig and a fox, Don. Let's get honest. The only thing
that is ever going to satisfy Craig is to get the Struts name for JSF,
period. Let him go ahead and try to make it on his own. That won't work
and its failure will keep JSF from continuing its trampy attempt to
integrate w
The obvious truth is so easy to state. Thanks, Tim.
On 6/21/06, Tim O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...we're dealing with the ramifications of dismantling Jakarta from years
ago.I actually think that this situation would have never arose if
Struts and Shale were two sibling subprojects
This is so odd. You begin by recognizing the problem and trying to hide
it. Now you deny the problem and want to continue it in spades. Everyone
who knows anything about frameworks sees that these two frameworks are
inherently incompatible. They have been from the start. That is the
problem.
Thanks, Ted. Well said!
On 6/21/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/21/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I put this proposal out to help bring us together,
> not precipitate a "divorce" :)
We're not "divorcing" Tiles. Neither did we "divorce" any of the
components that now
The "Front Controller" is not really a controller. It is a child's tool for
people who are challenged by OOP and need tool help.
On 6/21/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Comments interspersed.
On 6/21/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Craig, thanks for your honesty a
The problem is that there is no common ground. Pretence is great, but not
really effective. It will bit you in the butt later.
On 6/21/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You make a lot of good points, and a strong argument for rallying around
the JSF
flag. To this end, Shale is a great
The success of Spring is not that "people like modularity".
On 6/21/06, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ted Husted wrote:
> So, in addition to including the Action 1.3 JARs in the SAF 2.0
> release, essentially, you are suggesting that we also include the
> Shale 1.x JARs in the sa
It would be impossible to pull off. Since Struts and JSF are inherently
incompatible, there would be a my way or I will run away from home from
Craig and an unwillingness of the Struts community to quit a true controller
based framework. There is no way to make this marriage work.
On 6/21/06, P
What is the problem? Who caused it? Bingo! Eureka?
On 6/21/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paul Benedict wrote:
> I don't see the point in bundling Shale into a "Struts 2.0"
distribution. No
> offense to anyone who develops Shale, but when we have packages called
> "action2", it mak
Over on the infrastructure list, there's a thread about MyFaces is
running a nightly build for ADF in their Zone, and no one squawked, so
I'd say go for it.
-Ted.
On 6/21/06, James Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ok, I've added Action 1, Action 2, and Shale to Continuum. We need
to decide
AFIAC, you're doing the work, and you can make the decision. :)
-Ted.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: "Dakota Jack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> These are not "camps" of a framework but competing frameworks. That is the
> bottom line. Struts is dying and you guys, Gary, are killing it. Why not
> man up and get your own space and try to survive on your own?
>
I'm not opposed to Shale moving o
On Jun 21, 2006, at 8:31 PM, Ted Husted wrote:
We like to chatter about what's best for Struts, or what Struts is,
but I think the key question is what's Shale, and what's best for
Shale? I remain concerned that, after two years on a greenfield, there
has not been a GA release of Shale. I have
On 6/21/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Again, Struts Action and Struts Shale would both retain their separate projects,
codebases, and release cycles. Struts 2.0 is about building something on top of
our Struts efforts to create a unified front to users. Users don't care about
all th
On 6/22/06, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is going to be short, both because I'm on a deadline and because
I think the important points have already been covered.
I'm not in favor of distributing Shale as a library behind a Struts 2
that promotes the Action 2 controller. Shale's s
My 2 cents.
I agree with Don that we have created "user" confusion by having two
competing frameworks. However I think if we're going to continue to
have both then they should both be "first class citizens" - rather
than relegating Shale.
Personally, user confusion is secondary IMO to whether th
On 6/22/06, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
P.S. I was at a Sun "java roadshow" this week - they were putting out
the message that Shale is the next Struts
I've seen this several times. People should clarify what they mean by
this. Is it more like "The Queen is dead. Long live the
On 6/22/06, Greg Reddin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem with moving it is that we have to set
up all the infrastructure to support it. Not just the bureaucracy of
its own TLP and PMC, but the spreading thinner of the people
involved. For example, how many Apache projects can somebody lik
On 6/22/06, Hubert Rabago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/22/06, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is going to be short, both because I'm on a deadline and because
> I think the important points have already been covered.
>
> I'm not in favor of distributing Shale as a library behind
On 6/22/06, Michael Jouravlev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In the meantime I want to make sure that SAF1 will not be simply
removed from source repository just because SAF2 is the official
future.
The future belongs to the volunteers willing to do the work. So long
as we have volunteers to work o
Where is lives is less of a concern, but I'd be happy either as a TLP
or as part of MyFaces. I'm very glad that Shale was accepted here
and given time to grow and develop a community, but I think it's time
to find a new home. I'd like to see Struts (the project) return to a
focus on building
On 6/22/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What about a "generic" Faces project, like portals or ws ?
Apache Faces.
To me Shale fits fine into that.
There - in an apache faces land - is enough space for:
Myfaces
Tomahawk
Tobago
Shale
Sandbox (well, our sandbox)
and soon Trinida
To me it makes more sense to have an Apache Faces TLP
with lot's of subprojects.
MyFaces as TLP is sometimes confusing too.
Why all these component libs.
For instance you can't mix Tobago with Tomahawk.
... but you can use Tobago with each JSF impl
so, hey I am +1 for a Apache Faces TLP
and +1
What is the status of 1.3.5? It sounds like it's almost baked.
By the way, I am volunteering to continue adding features to 1.x. Michael says
he is also. I read today Niall is too. Who else on the team still wishes to add
features for this codebase? Just looking to know who is on the "inner tea
On 6/22/06, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What is the status of 1.3.5? It sounds like it's almost baked.
By the way, I am volunteering to continue adding features to 1.x. Michael says he is
also. I read today Niall is too. Who else on the team still wishes to add features for
this c
On 6/22/06, Michael Jouravlev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I just created a first draft of what I envision as part of updated 1.3
documentation that describes new features for 1.3 ;-)
http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsComponents
The WAR file is attached, see the bottom of the page. The WAR cont
On 6/22/06, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What is the status of 1.3.5? It sounds like it's almost baked.
By the way, I am volunteering to continue adding features to 1.x. Michael
says he is also. I read today Niall is too. Who else on the team still
wishes to add features for this co
Well... What are the ramifications of removing bugzilla? Can we just get rid of
any bugzilla links we have on our site? Advertise jira.
Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 6/22/06, Paul Benedict
wrote:
>
> What is the status of 1.3.5? It sounds like it's almost baked.
>
> By the way, I
On 6/22/06, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well... What are the ramifications of removing bugzilla?
Not sure what you mean by this. There's a great deal of history in there,
and thousands of references into it from mail threads, etc. I wouldn't want
to see that go away.
Can we just
I didn't pay attention to the JIRA migration, but I thought all bugzilla
tickets were imported to JIRA. If that's true, do old email links matter? I
mean, bugzilla won't be the eternal bug system -- eventually it will be
displaced.
Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 6/22/06, Paul Bened
I will be helping with *all* of Struts (1.2.x, 1.3.x, 2.0 and Shale)
for quite some time. I ain't going anywhere!
--
James Mitchell
On Jun 22, 2006, at 10:22 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
What is the status of 1.3.5? It sounds like it's almost baked.
By the way, I am volunteering to continu
Who would "they" be? Did anyone notice that Craig resurrected the failing
JSF for Sun? I really like Sun but this has to be the worst thing they have
managed to back.
On 6/22/06, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My 2 cents.
I agree with Don that we have created "user" confusion by
I see a lot more than "user" confusion, Niall. I see total confusion.
On 6/22/06, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My 2 cents.
I agree with Don that we have created "user" confusion by having two
competing frameworks. However I think if we're going to continue to
have both then they
I am just trying to figure out how all the movement the last few years fits
into this supposed picture of reality. How does Shale fit into this? How
does WebWorks fit into this? This is mere words without any inkling of the
reality of what happens on Struts.
On 6/22/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROT
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 08:36:47PM -0700, Paul Benedict wrote:
> Well... What are the ramifications of removing bugzilla? Can we just
> get rid of any bugzilla links we have on our site? Advertise jira.
A better solution would be to modify Bugzilla to let users know when a
bug has been superceded.
Hey Paul,
I'm interested in seeing Struts 1.x maintained as well and will contribute time
to
that effort.
James
On Thu Jun 22 20:22 , Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent:
>What is the status of 1.3.5? It sounds like it's almost baked.
>
>
>
>By the way, I am volunteering to continue addi
45 matches
Mail list logo
