Who was "bemoaning"? On 3/15/06, Greg Reddin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mar 14, 2006, at 10:25 PM, Frank W. Zammetti wrote: > > > JSF is a way for a lot of people to make money. Many vendors have > > a stake in its "commercial" success or failure. This has been true > > from the beginning. Some would say the whole point of JSF from the > > start was to make money for one company, and eventually a lot of > > other companies. Incidentally, I'm a happy capitalist, I therefore > > have no problem whatsoever with that! I just like that fact not > > being denied, and I for one do see it as fact. Contrast this with > > how something like Struts began, which came straight from the > > idealism you speak of, a desire to help a community, a desire by > > one developer to create something that not only helped themselves > > but helped others. I think that is a wonderful motivation. And > > that may have been that same developers' motivation with JSF as > > well, but I to this day do not believe it was the motivation of the > > larger entities involved. > > I find it ironic that people are bemoaning JSF for its commercial > interests. First, I seem to remember sometime between 2001 and 2003 > there were a lot of people asking "When is Struts going to become a > JSR?". So, for the moment let's just pretend that the motivation for > JSR-127 was to standardize an MVC framework. By the time JSR-127 was > introduced we were already discussing the things we'd do differently > in version 2 of Struts. Surely we didn't think the output of JSR-127 > would be Struts as we knew it then. Surely we wouldn't have been > happy if it had. > > Second, look at who is represented on the Expert Group for JSR-127. > Why would companies like Oracle, Borland, IBM, Macromedia, BEA, HP, > etc. bother to participate in a such project if they weren't > protecting their own interests? Just look at how many tool-makers > are present among the expert group. Is it any wonder the resulting > spec brings them the opportunity to cash in? That's not even to > mention all the other community-driven framework options that were in > play when JSF was under development. Personally, I think the > resulting framework is not too bad considering. I would've liked the > Struts worldview to have been better represented - or maybe I am > saying the "tool-less" developer's worldview. But given all the > players, I'm not surprised or disappointed with what we have. > > Now, directly to your point of commercial interests. You say "JSF is > a way for a lot of people to make money." What is Java? Do you > think Sun developed Java as a "love offering" to the developer > community? Why do any of these organizations exist? For that > matter, why do I develop software? Is it because I've found the > meaning of life or simply because it's better than working at a > rendering plant? Well, for me it's somewhere in the middle. But for > organizations like Sun, Oracle, or BEA, it's all about the > economics. I'm not talking about the individuals that work at these > companies. I'm talking about the organizations themselves. At the > organizational level, they are solely about increasing financial > gain. And I'm not saying that's bad. If they weren't they would > quickly go out of business. People start companies to grow > business. People start non-profit organizations (like ASF) for the > betterment of mankind. So I guess I find the argument of commercial > interests to be completely irrelevant. > > I like some aspects of JSF and I dislike others. For some tasks I > find it vastly superior to Struts. For others I find it difficult to > use. Now *maybe* if JSF was developed in a community instead of a > committee it would be less intrusive and more useful. But that's one > of the reasons I have hope for Shale. It starts with the foundation > of the JSF standard. It then builds on the foundation in a community- > centric way and that has the possibility of resulting in something > very useful. > > Greg > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
-- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~
