Ted Husted wrote:
On 4/19/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Second, all the comitters have answered your questions very nicely
Yes, we have.
I don't know whether you actually believe this in your own mind.
However, there is a complete electronic archive of this forum and I
don't think that examining it would support this view.
Here is what I think someone would find by examining the archive.
Whenever certain pointed questions are posed, one of two things happens:
(1) The person being posed the question simply walks away from the
discussion. This has happened at least a couple of times in
conversations where I have asked you to clarify points you have made,
Ted. This is also the approach Niall Pemberton has used a couple of
times. You write something, and then when somebody brings up
counter-arguments are asks you to clarify one or more of your points,
you just walk away from the discussion.
The other thing that frequently happens is this:
(2) The other person (or sometimes a proxy) resorts to illegitimate
ad-hominem discourse to dodge the perfectly legitimate question being
posed. This is the approach used at different times by James Mitchell,
Steve Raeburn, and Craig McClanahan.
I believe that my characterization above of what happens in these
discussions is accurate. If anybody likes, I will provide direct
examples linking the points in the discussions in the archives. However,
I would add that, in general, the people receiving the explanation or
answer are the ones to judge whether the explanation or answer is
satisfactory, *not* the person offering the explanation. For example,
you, Ted, are not the proper judge of whether books you have written
helpful or complete or accurate -- people who read them are the proper
judges of that. Of course, I believe cases have come up of authors
writing reviews of their own books on amazon.com, but this, of course,
is not legitimate.
So, your judgement that you yourself have answered questions
satisfactorily is basically beside the point.
Now, as for the stream of "Ted-speak" that is quoted below these lines,
I have some questions about that, and I am in significant disagreement
with some of the points you make. For example, I think this idea that
open-source projects that offer broadly similar sorts of tools and
solutions are not actually *competing* with one another is humbug of a
high order.
I started writing a rebuttal to that and some of your points below, but
then stopped, because I realized that you would again just walk away
from the discussion. I would be glad to present my counter-arguments to
the points you make, but I would need some sign that you would not just
walk away from the discussion yet again.
So, there it is, Ted. are you going to walk away from this discussion?
Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
Here's a handy summary for future reference:
The Apache Struts project continues to move that the same pace we
always have. We generally run 18 months to 24 months between release
series. The Struts 1.3.x series has already begun, and a 1.3.0 build
is available for testing. From the beginning, there were several teams
that started after us and issued a 1.0 release before Struts 1.0 came
out in June 2001. Other teams do move faster, but faster is not always
better.
We add committers on a regular basis. We use the same protocols as all
other ASF projects. (Right now, there are about thirty active ASF
projects with almost two thousand committers.) ASF projects look for
"people that we believe are devoted to the task and match the human
attitudes required to work well with others, especially in
disagreement". There are no "lead developers" on ASF projects. Every
binding vote counts as much as every other. Voting aside, everyone is
invited to donate patches and participate in the development
discussions. Some ASF projects always post a patch before committing
it. We aren't asking anyone to do something that we wouldn't do
ourselves.
We do *not* consider other projects "competitors". We consider
ourselves colleagues who are trying to solve the same problem in
different ways, in search of better solutions. The Apache Struts
website links to several similar projects, like Wicket and Spring MVC,
and our FAQ encourages visitors to look for the solution that best
serves their own needs. The ASF alone has five web application
framework projects. In the data persistence area, we have four
products now, and a fifth is in the Incubator. For us, it's not about
"competition", it's about a community of developers working together
to find different ways to solve our own problems.
For Apache Struts 2.0, we've had three formal proposals. One of those
turned in to a subproject, Shale (which is nearing a stable release).
Another, Ti, evolved into a merger with one of our colleague projects,
WebWork. As we worked on Ti, which was based on XWork, the lead
WebWork committers mentioned that they would like to join forces with
another framework. At first, Don and I thought that "joining forces"
meant that we would start a new project, but Patrick and Jason wanted
to join Apache Struts instead. So that's the path we followed. We are
not interested in reinventing the wheel. All we want to do is create
and maintain the frameworks that we want to use to build our own
applications.
We do have committers who remain interested in the Struts Action 1.x
codebase. We have 1.x applications in production, just like everyone
else. Most of these applications would not be migrated to Action 2,
but would be maintained in their current form. (I have a stable
application that is based on Struts 1.0, and it works just fine, thank
you very much.) Of course, like anyone else with Action 1.x
applications, the committers are going to be interested in new
extensions, like Strecks, as well as proposals and patches as to how
to continue evolving the 1.x codebase. Anyone actually following
Struts 1.x development knows that we do accept and apply patches on a
regular basis.
In the field, I find that many teams have standardized on Struts 1.1,
and have no wish to change. Struts 1.1 is solving their problems, and
until they have new problems, they are happy campers. Personally, I
don't believe that most teams don't want to update their web
application more than once every two years. It was not our intention
to move slowly, but, in retrospect, I believe that a calm and steady
pace is one reason Struts 1.x remains the most popular web application
framework for Java.
New and improved extensions to Action 1 continue to appear regularly.
In *2006* alone, we've seen the release of Strecks, JSP Control Tags,
Sprout, Spring Web Flow, DWR, Calyxo, FormDef, and Java Web Parts.
There are dozens of books and literally hundreds of articles available
to help people get started with Action 1 or improve the application
they already have.
For more, see the Apache Struts roadmap FAQ
* http://struts.apache.org/roadmap.html
HTH, Ted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
