This is a very, very strange attitude, Alexandre. I don't think there is bugging going on. I really enjoy Jonathan's posts. If you don't, just don't read them for crying out loud. Don't be so damned controlling about things you don't like.
On 4/19/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 4/19/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dave Newton wrote: > > > Jonathan Revusky wrote: > > > > > >>[...] rather than trying to modernize/refactor it forward > > > > > > > > > From a developer's standpoint I'm not even sure how I'd go about > > > refactoring the existing Struts 1.x codebase... > > > > > > As an example, I've always been pissy about the Action being tightly > > > coupled to the servlet spec., returning something only useful in the > > > context of Struts 1.x, etc. (Who hasn't?! :) > > > > > > Okay, how do I remove that dependency? Just thinking out loud, so > parts > > > of this will be dumb. > > > > > > - App functionality already moved into injectable objects > > > - Change request processor to put params etc. into an "action context" > > > (just a map?) rather than directly accessing HttpServletRequest (or > its > > > wrapper) > > > - Change action processing to accept a different type of forward (just > a > > > string, no-brainer?) > > > - Minor validation rework to accept POJOs rather than ActionForms > > > - Pluggable request processing/path handling > > > - ...etc. > > > > > > I dunno... Sure looks a lot like stuff that already exists. I wouldn't > > > rewrite/refactor it either; I would start over. > > > > > > Now, it might be feasible to write a wrapper around an > already-existing > > > framework (or minorly tweaked one) to process existing struts > > > code/configs/Actions etc. and this might provide an incremental > > > migration path, but... > > > > > > *shudder* > > > > Well, there all these issues, and yeah, I guess they could make you and > > other people shudder. I mean, among the existing Struts committers there > > is no stomach apparently to try to do anything significant with the > > Struts 1.x codebase and they just prefer to either start something new > > (Shale) or bring in a previously competing codebase (Webwork) and work > > on that. > > > > But the real key point I am wondering about is this: if the existing > > Struts developers have no plans for developing the Struts 1.x codebase, > > what is the justification for not letting people who want to work on > > that (independently of whether this reflects good taste on their part or > > not) come in and work on it? > > > > Well why don't you do it yourself and stop BUGGING the users of this > list so they can stop receiving your "How great I am" emails. You > should really check out this Apache license which from what I heard > give you the right to evolve Struts yourself and this great site > called SourceForge.net which give you a free CVS repository access. > Seriously, I have never seen a guy more in love with himself. > > > > Given the basic parameters of the situation, what would there possibly > > be to lose? > > > > Jonathan Revusky > > -- > > lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ > > > > > > > > > > (But an interesting *shudder* I'll admit... *ponder*) > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > Alexandre Poitras > Québec, Canada > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~
