I understand what your saying, and even agree, but on the point of marketing... granted, none of us, whether committer or not, is here to do marketing, but isn't there a certain degree of responsibility (potentially) to not confuse the market when there is precedent?
I mean, if I wanted to change the name of Java Web Parts tomorrow, it isn't like a huge chunk of the world is using it and would be confused by that (I'm happy to say its a growing chunk though!). Struts, being the de facto Java development framework at this point, and for some time now, I think forces a certain degree of responsibility on those stewarding it to be a little more careful. Is that not a reasonable position to take? I want to say again that I think you and the rest of the committers have done a good job over the past few weeks of removing a lot of the confusion that I and others saw a while ago. I think Shale's position has been clarified as well, so this is more of a philosophical discussion at this point, Darwin would appear to have done his thing already in the real world :) Frank On Fri, December 16, 2005 12:43 pm, Ted Husted said: > On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> unreasonable. Is Struts an umbrella for two different paths, Shale and >> Action Framework, or is Shale really potentially the next Struts? I do >> think there is a contradiction there. > > One of the core Apache beliefs is that "Darwin decides". An ASF > project does not have an "alpha geek" that makes all the decisions. We > come to decisions collaboratively over time. > > One of the reasons we like to give new proposals and codebases names > is because we don't want to decide until we see the code and try it > for ourselves. It's very possible, even probable, that Ti will be the > next Action, but, until we see more of the code, and migrate some of > our own applications, we're reluncant to drop the codename. > > If we were subject to a marketing department, we might do things > differently. But, we are all just engineers here, making decisions > based on engineering principles alone. I know that some people think > we should make decisions based on marketing principles. But I don't > believe the committers came here for the marketing. We came here to > collaborate on the engineering. > > We aren't Sun and we aren't Microsoft, or even Linus. We aren't going > to tell you what product you should be using in your own application. > That's your decision. We like to share our own engineering decisions > with the group, but, only because we are always looking for new people > to collaborate with us on the engineering. > >>From an engineering perspective, being able to work on both Shale/JSF > and Action/JSP is an exciting idea. The frameworks are different in > many ways, but alike in many others. Moving forward, I think we can > find many places where the frameworks can share more code and more > ideas. As always, we are still inventing the future. > > > -Ted. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
