Bart, if you don't think there is a problem, move on. There is nothing here for you. I can only imagine that your involvement in Struts is at the level of playing, if this is your attitude. I have left tinker toys behind and am trying to deliver to real world problems.
I hardly think that "everyone" on a project that failed would be clamoring to support a discussion of their failure. That would happen on a project that succeeded. People that succeed tend to like to look at their work and to learn from failures. People that fail hate it. So, your reasoning is quite skewed. Of course, it is obvious that you have no intention of reasoning. I am just trying to keep the dialogue going long enough to get a message across that it is okay and even good to discuss difficulties. This is a very valuable thing to learn in work, as well in life, Bart. I recommend it. Do you get that? On 4/1/06, Bart Busschots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Right, > > You assume that Struts 1 was a disaster and was messed up. Not all of us > agree with you. I for one don't. If you look at it from my point of view > and that of the others who agree with me there is no big burning > question to be answered because there was no massive cockup. If everyone > agreed with you this list would be full of people clamouring to support > you in your just cause. It doesn't appear to be so I would guess you are > in the minority. > > Bart. > > Dakota Jack wrote: > > >Do you think there is any value in letting a situtation which led to the > >problem go by without lessons learned, Paul? Do you think just because > the > >people who coded the hairball are not talking about it we should just let > it > >drop and believe that they won't do the same thing with WebWorks? Is > that > >what you think? You do seem to get the fact that there is a real, > >unaddressed problem. I don't think we need you to tell us when we should > >stop talking. If you don't get it, then move on. Noone is holding your > >nose to this grindstone. I am amazed when people are concerned that > others > >are addressing an issue. What is with that? If you are tired of talking > we > >should stop? That is a very odd way to think. > > > >On 3/29/06, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>This topic has become stale, in my opinion, and I do not understand > >>why people continue to participate in it. When people attempt to have > >>a successful discussion, there is usually a goal to attain, but I am > >>unable to discern what serious goal there is in telling the commiters > they > >>are, in so many words, lousy, a failure, makers of bad products, the > >>fathers of stagnation, betrayers of their foundation, etc. :-) > >>Discussions can be alot of fun and productive and bear good fruit, > >>but discussions, like fruit, also wither after a season.... and I think > >>the season is well underway for all the participants to just accept > >>that you've been heard, not everyone will agree, and finger-pointing > >>isn't productive. -- Paul > >> > >>--- Al Eridani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts > >>>>guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than > >>>> > >>>> > >>Struts > >> > >> > >>>>1.X. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>And you see it wrongly. Either you came late into this and could not be > >>>bothered to check the archives or your attention span is so short that > >>>you have forgotten already. > >>> > >>>It all started when some Struts committers described their relatively > >>> > >>> > >>closed > >> > >> > >>>environment (limiting who could contribute) and Jonathan wondered > >>>aloud whether that lack of openness had been a contributing factor to > >>>Struts decline. > >>> > >>>The question was never addressed because, in the inmortal words of one > >>>of the defenders of the faith, "the question is invalid". > >>> > >>>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>__________________________________________________ > >>Do You Yahoo!? > >>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > >>http://mail.yahoo.com > >> > >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>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~ > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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~
