Yep.... Glad everyone agrees.
Personally I think Christian Cryder did a very impressive job. However design and elegance often aren't what matters at the end of the day. I'll contradict that with saying elegance always pays off! But who has written a book about Barracuda?... There are a few companies in the city that have evolved there one frameworks that are similar to Barracuda. I have used the good design from Barracuda to evalute the appropriateness of some of these approaches. Struts is exciting because it has such momentum. Barracuda is exciting because it is the most complete MVC framework I've seen. It is far beyond velocity, webwork and others that have been mentioned within this forum. I fully believe in time we'll have much of what is missing within struts. Let's keep being pragmatic and not over complicate the ease of use that got us excited in the first place and gradually evolve struts to scale to the most challenging environments that may need such things as action chains, component models and event models. -Daniel -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 9:43 PM To: Struts Developers List Subject: RE: Hello, all. Yep. Same decision I made. Im glad I went with struts. :-) -----Original Message----- From: David Graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 10:34 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Hello, all. >From: "Andrew Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: Hello, all. >Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 10:17:26 +0800 > >Barracuda is an impressive framework. It also has quite a powerful event >model which struts lacks. >The rendering seems tied to XMLC however. Ive not used Barracuda myself so >dont know how hard it would be to make it play with a different view >technology. That said, using a DOM approach for rendering has substantial >advantages. As it happens Im also using a non jsp DOM based rendering >approach (not xmlc though) for the view in my struts app - and it must be >said from this experience that struts certainly doesnt tie you down to a >particular view technology. :-) > ><btw> >Interesting to note that many of the things that struts lacks compared to >frameworks such as Barracuda are addressed in the JSF spec - events, >component models, etc... >Im very much looking forward to Struts for JSF... ></btw> This is a direct result of Struts not trying to be everything to everyone. The main Struts functionality (action controller) is unlikely to become a standard as far as i can tell. So, Struts fits nicely into a comprehensive web framework composed of various standards and your own code. I'd much rather develop apps that use standards and appropriate toolkits like Struts than with something like Barracuda. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Daniel Honig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 04:59 >To: Struts Developers List >Subject: RE: Hello, all. > > >In order to stick my head out so it can be cut off... > > >Well I think that Struts rocks first off... > >But when you compare it to a framework like: >http://barracuda.enhydra.org/ >http://barracuda.enhydra.org/cvs_source/Barracuda/docs/what_the_heck_is_bar r >acuda.html > > >It seems clear to me that struts is not as elegant. > >Struts does not as clearly seperate M-V-C. > >Struts lacks a component model that Barracuda cleanly identifies. > > >And I think this is fine. I wouldn't want to introduce Barracuda to alot >of >developer's >because it is more complex. Struts is a simple way of achieving the same >goal >and pragmatism is one of the values I prize most in this profession. > >-Daniel > >-----Original Message----- >From: David Graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 11:58 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Hello, all. > > >You'll want to join the struts-user list to learn more about Struts and get >help with any questions you might have. The struts-dev list is used by >developers to discuss bugs, enhancements, and general topics concerning the >framework's development. > >David > > > > > > > >From: Joseph Ottinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: Re: Hello, all. > >Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:45:14 -0500 (EST) > > > >Then enlighten me? I wouldn't have joined the list at all if I hadn't >been > >interested in learning more. Dave had a substantive point, one I >responded > >to. Where I erred once, I'm sure I can err again; I'm trying to prevent > >that if I can. > > > >On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, micael wrote: > > > > > Joseph, you are making a fool out of yourself. You seem to have no >idea > > > how little you know. > > > > > > At 11:08 AM 12/9/2002 -0500, you wrote: > > > >On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, David Graham wrote: > > > > > > > > > Joseph, > > > > > I noticed you quoted me on your site but you left out the >important > >point > > > > > that Struts has never and will never dictate a model or view layer > > > > > technology. Struts gives you total freedom because at its core >it's > >simply > > > > > an action controller. The taglibs will be replaced by standards > >like JSTL > > > > > and JSF. > > > > > > > >Actually, I did note those things, while my definition of a "model" > > > >differs slightly from yours. I made a point out of mentioning in my > > > >introductory email here that I retracted one of my criticisms, >centered > > > >around your point. > > > > > > > > > I had never heard of your site before someone posted it on this >list > >and I > > > > > don't intend to visit it often. Struts does not need a defense on > >your > > > > > site. *You* need to actually build a meaningful app using Struts > >and then > > > > > make a judgement. The only "defense" of Struts I'll offer is >this: > > > > > Thousands of successful web applications have been produced >quickly > >and > > > > > cheaply using Struts. Struts is the most popular Java web MVC > > > > framework for > > > > > a reason. I suggest you find out why. > > > > > > > >Lots of points here! > > > > > > > >For one thing, it's okay - my site has no banners, no sponsors >begging > >for > > > >extra traffic. Whether you visit often or not, well, hey - that's up >to > > > >you. As far as using struts: I've deployed struts apps, "meaningful" > >ones. > > > >I've found other frameworks to be more appropriate for more >situations. > > > >"Most popular" is fairly well beyond doubt, and I've never claimed > > > >otherwise (nor would I)... but then again, Windows is the "most > >popular" > > > >OS, and that doesn't mean it's the best solution. > > > > > > > > > I frankly don't care if some people don't like Struts; that's a > >matter of > > > > > personal preference. I do care when it is misrepresented with > >ignorant > > > > > statements. > > > > > > > >Indeed! I agree with this; as I've stated, my goal was to explain a > > > >viewpoint that was asked about. I joined this list so that I could > > > >determine what actually *IS* incorrect and fix that. > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------- > >Joseph B. Ottinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >http://enigmastation.com IT Consultant > > > >-- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: > ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >For additional commands, e-mail: > ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >_________________________________________________________________ >The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* >http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail > > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
