Jonathan, do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?
On 3/30/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Vinny wrote: > > There have been many time in history when an individual > > catholic _has_ been more catholic than the Pope. > > I am simply giving my opinion. > > Well, that's true, I guess. You've got a point there, Vinny. > > So, yeah, feel free. Be more catholic than the pope. Keep maintaining > that Struts 1.x is great stuff after the Struts developers themselves > have abandoned it in favor of Webwork. > > Jonathan Revusky > -- > lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>Vinny wrote: > >> > >>>I still say that struts 1.x has not "lost" to webwork. > >>>When I do a quick unscientific search on monster.com for > >>>"struts" I get over 1000 jobs listed. The same search for "webwork" > >>>yields 22 jobs. Apparently struts "won" on the business front, > >> > >>That's a different question entirely. The question posed up top here in > >>the subject line is: "Why did Struts development stagnate?" > >> > >>Actually, you could append to that question, given this above data -- > >>"Why did Struts development stagnate -- *despite* having such a huge > >>user community and so on and so forth.... as documented above...." > >> > >> > >>>I don't think that is even debatable. > >> > >>Well, I don't either. That's why that is not the subject of the debate. > >> > >> > >>>Now if we want to talk about > >>>technical prowess then maybe Jonathan might have a point. > >> > >>It was about technical prowess. "Struts development" -- the fact that > >>the Struts developers have abandoned the 1.x codebase decided to base > >>"Struts Action 2" on the Webwork codebase. > >> > >> > >>>I can't comment > >>>on it because like a good little scientist I'd like to do some > >>>experiments first. > >> > >>Well, look, Vinny, if the Struts developers themselves prefer to base > >>Struts 2 on Webwork, they are saying that Webwork is technically better. > >>If you want to defend Struts 1.x after that, then you're in the position > >>of being more catholic than the pope. > >> > >>Jonathan Revusky > >>-- > >>lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ > >> > >> > >>>To me this seems like a nice merger that benefits both projects. > >>>The betamax vs VHS , RISC vs CISC, frameworkC vs frameworkD, Bush vs > Kerry > >>>debates are rapidly becoming background noise to me. > >>> > >>>On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Niall Pemberton wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>From: "Jonathan Revusky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>>>Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:27 PM > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>It still seems broadly on-topic to me. It's certainly a legitimate, > >>>>>>well-formulated question. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Seriously, the only other possibility I see is struts-dev. If it's > >>>>>>off-topic on both struts-user and struts-dev, then the question > really > >>>>>>is (as I am starting to suppose) basically taboo. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>The question isn't taboo - I posed the same kind of thing (and > offered one > >>>>>perspective) in an earlier thread: > >>>>> > >>>>>http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.struts.user/122903 > >>>>> > >>>>>However I don't think what I said in that thread was the whole story > - > >>>>>clearly frameworks such as WebWork succeeded and I assume they were a > >>>>>volunteer effort as well. > >>>> > >>>>Yes, the bulk of your explanation there seemed to be that Struts was > an > >>>>all-volunteer effort and so on. > >>>> > >>>>This could not possibly be why it fell behind Webwork. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>We currently have 22 committers on Struts - > >>>> > >>>>Out of curiosity, what is your rough guess as to how many of these 22 > >>>>people committed any code in the last... year, let's say. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>but levels of activity vary > >>>>>widely and I would say that the type of talented people it takes to > drive a > >>>>>project forward (and I don't include myself in that group) no longer > have an > >>>>>interest in doing so on the Action 1 side - for various reasons. > People such > >>>>>as Craig put their effort into developing the JSF standard and see > that as > >>>>>the future for web development and that is where they now concentrate > their > >>>>>effort. Don was doing alot of work inovating with Struts Ti > >>>> > >>>>Well, I was not aware of this. However, you mean that Struts TI was a > >>>>complete rewrite of the framework? I mean, was there a tacit > assumption > >>>>there that Struts 1.x could not be evolved forward and required a > >>>>complete rewrite? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>and had the > >>>>>offer to merge not come along from WebWork - we would probably be > seeing the > >>>>>fruits of his efforts as Action2 and not even discussing "stagnation" > at > >>>>>this point. Ted was AWOL doing C# for a while (hes been "back" for a > while > >>>>>which is good :-), Martin seems focused on javascript etc. etc. So I > guess > >>>>>this leads to the next question "Well why didn't we attract new > talented > >>>>>people into the project that would drive Struts forward?" This I > don't > >>>>>know - seems that lots of people decided to go invent their own web > >>>>>framework (YAWF) rather than get involved with Struts. Some of that > is > >>>>>certainly their own egos being the "founder of a framework" and some > of it I > >>>>>believe is the compatibility issue - its far easier to write a brand > new > >>>>>shiny web framework when not hampered by backwards compatibility. > Whether we > >>>>>as a community "put them off" I have no knowledge - but I've never > seem that > >>>>>proferred anywhere as a reason. It was always something like "Struts > sucks > >>>>>because of x, y and z and my brand new shiny framework does it > better". > >>>>>Course its far easier to invent a new framework by looking at > existing ones > >>>>>and seeing how you can improve them. Back to the "new people" > question > >>>>>though - its not my perspective that we have lots of people knocking > at the > >>>>>door trying to give us contributions and we're turning them away. I > believe > >>>>>its easy to become a Struts committer - you offer reasonable code, > are > >>>>>helpful in the community (e.g. answering questions on the user list), > been > >>>>>around a while and don't start flame wars or attack people personally > - then > >>>>>you get asked. Theres probably 2/3 people who probably think they > should > >>>>>have been asked, but haven't - they may or may no have a point - but > besides > >>>>>them I don't see it as a case of Struts excluding people and I don't > have an > >>>>>explanation for why there are not hoards of people wanting to join. > >>>> > >>>>Well, first of all, on the question of people going off and doing > their > >>>>own framework, you have to basically figure that some of these people > >>>>just didn't think that they could apply their ideas in this setting. > If > >>>>somebody with a fire in their belly and some innovative ideas had > showed > >>>>up here and wanted to work on that, would they have been able to do > so? > >>>> > >>>>After all, the fact remains that everybody knows that any work they do > >>>>under the ASF umbrella will get much more attention and usage than it > >>>>would otherwise. This is the main (probably the only) reason that the > >>>>Webwork people have come here. So, a priori, your saying that you > aren't > >>>>attracting collaborators is really quite odd, isn't it? > >>>> > >>>>The thing is, Niall, that pretty much all the times you get a new > >>>>collaborator, that person was first a user. Typically that someone is > a > >>>>"power user", and is pushing the limits of what the tool can do, and > >>>>starts donating code to make the tool more powerful, and next thing > you > >>>>know, the guy is a collaborator. > >>>> > >>>>Now, you've got a lot of users, so that this basic mechanism doesn't > >>>>operate is rather odd. > >>>> > >>>>What I have noticed is that the communication with your user community > >>>>is rather poor. Basically, for all of it, the bulk of your users seem > >>>>completely clued out as to what is going on with the Webwork merger. > >>>> > >>>>For example, you get people flaming me because I am saying that > Webwork > >>>>is better than Struts. They say "stop bashing Struts". But I am saying > >>>>exactly what the Struts developers are saying! They have accepted that > >>>>Webwork is better than Struts! So am I supposed to be more catholic > than > >>>>the pope? > >>>> > >>>>Also these people assume that I must be a Webwork developer. Somebody > >>>>wrote a spoof of me in which I was praising Webwork to the skies! I > have > >>>>nothing to do with Webwork. I have never even used it. When I say > >>>>Webwork is better, I am simply echoing what the Struts PMC are already > >>>>saying. > >>>> > >>>>So, I mean, some of this is just going on because people don't know > >>>>what's going on. I see a real communications failure. > >>>> > >>>>If people really knew that the current Struts 1.x codebase is being > >>>>abandoned, you would think that there would be a lot more threads on > >>>>this list about migration issues. "I've got this Struts 1.x App and I > >>>>just was having a look at Webwork, which is going to be Struts Action > 2 > >>>>and have various questions about how my app can be migrated...." I > don't > >>>>see threads like that, which means to me that you have not > communicated > >>>>to your rank and file users what is really going on here. > >>>> > >>>>Now, if there really is a problem in terms of user<->developer > >>>>communication here, it would explain why the process whereby certain > >>>>power users become collaborators is not happening as often as it > should. > >>>>And this would be a factor in the stagnation. > >>>> > >>>>Certainly, given the size of the user community, even if 1 in 100 > people > >>>>eventually became committers via that process, you would have a lot of > >>>>active committers. > >>>> > >>>>That a community like webwork with far fewer users nonetheless has a > >>>>more active, real developer team, is really something to look at. > >>>> > >>>>Certainly, in earlier discussions, most people just seemed to think > that > >>>>it was really hard to become a commmitters. So if that is a > >>>>misconception, it is a widely held one. There's something odd going on > here. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>Another answer to the question is "it hasn't stagnated - > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>Stop, Niall, stop. That's not an answer. :-) Let's not go around > >>>>completely in circles. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>we've moved on to > >>>>>Shale" and that is the future for existing Struts users. > >>>> > >>>>Well, if that is the case, you haven't communicated it to your users. > >>>> > >>>>I grant that if you are going to communicate something to your users, > >>>>you should probably have a consistent message. The Action/Shale > >>>>cohabitation seems to almost preclude having a consistent message. > >>>> > >>>>Anyway, JSF/Shale is just something completely different > >>>>paradigmatically and the idea of that as "Struts 2" is really quite > odd. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>Clearly there are > >>>>>quite a few people that will disagree with this - but also alot that > will > >>>>>say "great I buy JSF as the future and I'm glad the Struts project > has an > >>>>>offering that supports this". > >>>> > >>>>Well, unless you are offering migration tools or a compatibility layer > >>>>or something, how does it benefit your users that Shale is under the > >>>>"Struts umbrella" any more than if it was a separate project? I mean, > >>>>it's a paradigmatic shift that you have to get head around either way > >>>>and existing apps would need to be refactored. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>At the end of the day though this does seem academic, - since we now > have two > >>>>>offering for whatever camp you fall into (component orientated or > action > >>>>>orientated) and from my point of view the really good thing about the > >>>>>WebWork merger is not only the great software were getting - but also > the > >>>>>talented new blood thats coming into the project. > >>>> > >>>>Well, if you accept that the Webwork people just ran the better > project, > >>>>you guys failed to keep Struts 1.x going at least in terms of > innovation > >>>>and development, then by that logic, the current Struts PMC should > just > >>>>step down probably and let the Webwork people run the show. > >>>> > >>>>If the same PMC that presided over technical stagnation before is > going > >>>>to remain the managers of the project, then I think it isn't an > academic > >>>>question. You have to examine the mistakes you made before. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>So I've given my answer to the question - now can we let this list > get back > >>>>>to helping and answering user questions - which is its main purpose? > >>>> > >>>>Niall, I don't know what you're talking about here. I see no sign that > >>>>the list stopped helping people and answering their questions due to > the > >>>>presence of this thread. > >>>> > >>>>You were giving some signs that you now were willing to talk about > this. > >>>>You've had a certain say about this now. You've stepped forward and > said > >>>>the topic is not taboo. Well, now you're saying, let's not talk about > it > >>>>any more, i.e. I broke the taboo temporarily to get this guy off my > >>>>back, but nudge nudge, wink, wink, the topic really is taboo. > >>>> > >>>>Okay, maybe that wasn't your intent, but if not, and the topic isn't > >>>>taboo, how do you know other people don't have opinions to express > now? > >>>> > >>>>Again, the idea that this is an either-or proposition and the list has > >>>>to choose between talking about this and helping people by answering > >>>>technical questions is actually absurd, isn't it? > >>>> > >>>>Jonathan Revusky > >>>>-- > >>>>lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>Niall > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>-- > >>>Ghetto Java: http://www.ghettojava.com > >> > >> > >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Ghetto Java: http://www.ghettojava.com > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/ Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is afraid of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
