On Apr 1, 2005 11:20 AM, Erik Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree. I thought, Craig, that you until recently were interested in
> Struts and JSF coexisting, meaning that both would grow, even if you
> were no longer the active leader of Struts.

There is an integration library that lets you do the migration to the
visual components (without changing your actions).  However, if you
stop at just the components, you end up with a more complex
architecture (indeed, if you look inside the implementation, you have
a front controller in front of a front controller), plus endless
decisions for adding future capabilities to the same app -- for
example, do I do navigation the Struts way or the JSF way?

It works, but it's complicated.  And I do *not* recommend this
approach for new apps; only as a transition strategy.

> 
> As a developer, I have no interest in JSF, but am interested in Struts 1.3.
> 

Youll be quite happy, then (as I am), that Struts 1.3 remains under
active development.  Lots of people have lots of code (and knowledge)
invested in 1.x, and it's very nice to see that investment protected.

But I'm never going to use it myself.

Struts 1.x has been in development for very close to five years (1.0
was initially released just about four years ago).  We've all learned
a few things, in the intervening time, about how to make applications
easier to write, and I want to go leverage some of that (for example,
you don't need form beans at all in JSF, so there's no need to argue
over whether ActionForm should be an interface or a class :-), without
being constrained by backwards compatibility, and without having to
work as hard as Struts 1.x makes you work.

Feel free to continue using Struts, however, if that floats *your* boat.

> Erik

Craig

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to