Just to make sure the bases are covered, have you investigated JSF and found it lacking?
Quoting Rob Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Comments inline > > > On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 08:26:20 -0700, Michael McGrady > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have a proposal at the bottom of this email. > > > > I know exactly what you want. Struts is a wonderful potential base for > > this. I have been crying for this in Struts, but have only gotten > > resistence from the more vocal committers and, I think, a failure to see > > what the problem is. > > > > Right now Struts includes way too much application specific coding in > > the core. With a pretty concerted team effort it could be cleaned up, > > but with 1.3 on the way, that does not seem to be wise at the moment. > > With Struts 1.2 the problem seems to be increasing rather than > > decreasing. I really think there is a failure to understand the > > problem. > > Could be. I for one am still trying to nail down the issues. Why is > having a single WebApp that utilizes Inversion of Control and plugins > better than just having several webapps that use the same UI libraries > and abide by the same standards? From experience, I know that this has > not worked well for large teams, but I'm not I can clearly articulate > why, yet. > > > I am not too effective at advocating this, because I don't > > have the time to assuage feelings around these issues. > > When it comes to architecture and design, feelings suck. ;-) > > > > > With Struts 1.3 coming along, I have just bided my time and kept a copy > > of Struts to consider starting an offshoot that makes the core the core > > and the rest modular with plugins and extensibility. This might not be > > too hard, because the main thing is removing dependencies. > > > > PROPOSAL/SUGGESTION > > > > If you were interested, we might try doing this as a Struts Branch, > > maybe calling it "Branch" or "Struts Branch", with a really up-to-date > > modular structure along the lines indicated in Stuart Dabbs Halloway's > > "Component Development for the Java Program", keeping only a real kernel > > as the base. We could pop it up on SourceForge. I bet we could even > > recruit The Halloway Himself, even though he has gone elsewhere for the > > majority of his time right now. I don't think this presently exists. I > > do think that it would "sell" like wildfire to users. This would allow > > the user, in effect, to become automatic developers through their > > plugins and extensions. This would build a framework without ego in the > > core. > > I appreciate your interest and I'm flattered that you think this is a > good idea. Before we get to far down the road I'd like to surface more > of the problems and understand what it is we're talking about a little > more. > > > > > Michael McGrady > > > > James Mitchell wrote: > > > > >Apache Struts provides just what you want ;) That's about as generic as > you > > >can get. > > > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Rob Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > >>Folks, > > >> > > >> > > >>I'm wondering if anyone has thought about developing an Eclipse like > > >>WebApp framework. The idea is to provide an application shell and a > > >>contribution (think plugin) mechanism. Contributions could include, > > >>tabs, navigation, help, etc.. -- Kris Schneider <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> D.O.Tech <http://www.dotech.com/> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
