Dakota Jack wrote:
Good work, by the way, Phil. Lord, how easy the developers on Struts could
have done something similar.
Well, IMO the real underlying issue goes further than that. It's not a
question of the fact that the Struts developers could have done
"something similar" themselves. Actually, there's no need for them to
have done anything really. All they would need to "do" is get rid of
their insider, closed club mentality, and open the door for people like
Phil to come in. And then the stuff just happens....
You know, a few weeks ago, things got very nasty when I was just
pointedly asking people "Why did Struts development stagnate?"
I guess everybody really knows why more or less. But the topic is
taboo... I guess the taboo topic is coming up again. I wonder (in a
morbidly curious way) whether certain people are going to revert to the
same game plan and just get obnoxious and nasty to try to shut down the
"taboo" conversation.
Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
Thanks for at least showing them the way.
On 4/18/06, Phil Zoio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Please allow me to shed a bit more light on a couple of your
observations/speculations.
Regards,
Phil Zoio (Developer of Strecks)
My sense of things is that Strecks is another person's third-party
effort. It is not part of the Struts project. Any new development you
can expect from the Struts developers is bifurcating between Action2
(Webwork) and Shale.
I would venture to guess, just as an outside observer, that if the
author of Strecks is not given commit access to Struts itself, then he
may run into limitations in the Struts codebase and end up making
modifications to support things that Strecks needs, and end up with a
forked version of the Struts 1.x code.
Yes, if I could have my way I'd probably would have made a couple of
small changes to Struts to make my life a bit easier. On the whole,
though, I've accepted the constraints as given, and worked around them.
I have no intention of ending up with a forked version of Struts 1.x -
that would be defeating the whole point.
Of course, logically, if this guy is interested in developing further
on top of Struts 1.x, and existing Struts committers aren't, he
probably should be let in and Strecks might as well become Struts
1.3.x. or Struts 1.4.x and so on.
I'd be happy to pass Strecks on to Struts itself if the community really
wanted it, but I don't see that as essential to its existence in any way.
Somehow, I don't think that's likely to happen though. *Probably*
(note that I am speculating because I don't speak for others) the
preference of the Struts people would be just to let the Struts 1.x
codebase more or less rot and encourage people to move to Action2 or
Shale.
Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
