> Just to add my 2 cents. JSF would have been much more successful if it did > the following: > > 1. Depict itself as a successor to STRUTS rather than a competitor.
IMO this is how Craig presented it. JSF is also part of the JCP which is a different process then the ASF has. JSF is also targeting people using other frameworks besides Struts so I'm sure they had other goals besides 100% satisfaction of Struts users. JSF is a natural successor to Struts but iIt builds on a lot of the lessons learned from newer frameworks that were inspired by Struts (like Spring.) > 2. Provided easier side-by-side co-existence and allow finer grained porting > of a STRUTS application to the JSF framework. There is a Struts-Faces package that was designed for this purpose. Personally I think its easier to just scrap all of those Actions and ActionForms and start over. You don't even really need to start over, in our case, we used the facade pattern and called it from our actions. Now we call the same facade methods from our backing beans. > Warren sean
