On 8/25/05, David Durham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks, I'm following this list off and on, but fairly regularly, I > don't recall anyone else saying "hey, this shouldn't be in struts". I > have no doubt that others feel the way you do, just interested in some > names that's all.
I don't think that Shale *framework* is part of Struts framework. Therefore I believe that Shale would be better off with its own repository, mailing list, etc. But for better or worse, at present time Shale *project* is part of Struts project. On 8/22/05, Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Shale is in fact a part of Struts, as evidenced by its status as a > Struts subproject and its home amidst the Struts community, on the > Struts mailing lists, in the Struts SVN repository, etc, etc. Shale is part of Struts, because it has *status* of being a part of Struts? Why not just to say that Struts, Shale and JSF committers do things the way they consider appropriate. There is nothing wrong in it, and it is totally understandable. On 8/25/05, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > the Struts community is being more progressive, and > understands that technologies evolve. It's better for Struts to stay > closely connected to at least one of those evolution paths. What a flattery. Want to sweeten a pill, or recruiting Struts people into Shale ranks? ;-) On 8/25/05, Rick Reumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Would starting up a separate shale mailing list be a bad idea? I only > ask because the number of struts posts is quite heavy and if someone > posts a Shale question withough an approriate [shale] intro, I might > miss the post and end up deleting it if I get busy and it ends up buried > between the other struts posts? Craig, seems that you got Rick. Rick, how is life with Shale so far? :-) On 8/24/05, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I suspect the result will be that Craig will get what he was aiming > for, the Struts name for JSF. Nope. Most Struts developers and users will simply migrate to Shale/JSF (see above) or choose another framework, and Struts Classic will die in a year, or at best it will stay in maintenance mode for a while. If most people outside Struts mailing list think that Struts is outdated dinosaur not worth touching with a pole, then what's the point of renaming JSF into Struts? Will never happen. Therefore Struts Ti does not seem to be a marketable name for me. > I am presently switching over to Spring, and will try to develop a > Struts-like architecture there. (I know there is a Struts plugin, but > I would like an up-to-date IoC, AOP, framework under a real Struts.) > I probably will be better off there anyway, since I am philosophically > much closer to what is going on there. Don't get surprised if Spring starts to support JSF as default view technology. Michael. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
