>> The question is more that I don't understand why people wants to rewrite WO >> when you can simply extend it. > > I think the problem is obviously more "political" than technical. Technically > you are correct in that WebObjects is extensible with or without PW.
Seconded. I'm currently working at a company where I'm pretty free to use any java libraries I want to. However, due to that rather silly "you have to develop on a Mac"-clause in the WO license I *can't* introduce WO into the environment, since we've got all types of computers. And this is frustrating, because almost every day I find myself re-implementing functionality I could be using from JavaFoundation and Project Wonder. I honestly don't see what Apple gains by forbidding me and my coworkers to use WO. *sigh*. I keep having these wet dreams where I check wo-dev and find that Apple's stuck JavaFoundation, WO and EOF up on github. Cheers, - hugi _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
