On 12/1/05, Michael Jouravlev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have nothing against WebWork, I had looked into it once or twice, it > is surely a nice framework, but I will not buy WebWork skinned as > Struts.
I think what people sometimes forget is that we're not selling anything. If we were tring to "market" Struts, we wouldn't bother merging with WebWork. Under the Open Symphony license, we can use whatever WebWork code we want anytime we want. But, we're not trying to market Struts. We're trying to build a community of developers who care about collaborating. We're trying to get people like Patrick Lightbody and Jason Carreira to spend their volunteer hours with us. Patrick and Jason are excellent open source developers, and I'm flattered that they want to join us. The very simple answer about the merger is this: If you look at the Struts roadmap and the WebWork feature set, you'll see they've already done most of what we wanted to do, pretty much the way we would have done it ourselves. A good engineer doesn't reinvent the wheel. The Struts Action committers want to use WebWork for the same reason anyone wants to use a framework: It already does what we need a framework to do. What's left is getting there from here. Don's begun work on the compatibility layer. Meanwhile, I'm working on a set of "rosetta applications" that show how well-known Struts applications look as best-practice WebWork applications. I'm working on a MailReader port now, and a iBATIS JPetShop port would be next. Film at 11. :) -Ted. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
