Grokbase Groups Struts dev June 2006
Heh, yah, almost like real versioning, eh?
On 6/28/06, Paul Benedict wrote:

My two cents: I am okay with 1.x and 2.x numbering. It doesn't bother me.
I look at them in terms of generations; different people who can live
together in one family (webapp).

Michael Jouravlev wrote: In this case we are returning
to a half-year old situation, that is,
Struts 2 is a new crown holder of a single unified project. Consider
the announcements like this:

"Struts team is proud to announce immediate availability of Struts 2.0
as a next version of popular Struts framework. New features include
... "

and then:

"Struts team releases Struts 1.4, the next version of popular Struts
framework. New features include ... "

Things have not got simpler after divorce :)

I suppose that having Struts 2 as the next version works for you. But
I afraid that it does not work well for those who think about
releasing new versions of 1.x codebase.

So, maybe Win9x vs. WinNT is not that bad idea after all? And look at
them now, united. Now not only former NT users wait for Vista, but
former 9x users too :-))
On 6/28/06, Don Brown wrote:
I think it is as simple as Struts 1.3, Struts 1.4, Struts 2.0, Struts 2.1,
etc... The whole point of this proposal is to unify Struts as a single project,
getting away from this concept of separately versioned
"subprojects". There
will be Struts 1.x releases, and there will be Struts 2.x releases, and perhaps
some day, Struts 3.x releases.


Michael Jouravlev wrote:
You mean, Struts 2.0 version 2.0, then Struts 2.0 version 2.1, Struts
2.0 version 2.2, ..., Struts 2.0 version 3.0, ..., Struts 2.0 version


2.0 is a version number, while we are choosing project names (Are we?)
Do we treat Struts2 as the next version, or do we treat Struts and
Struts2 as separate subprojects like Win9x/Me vs. WinNT/2K/XP ?
(Obviously I prefer the latter)
How version numbers correspond to project names?
Can Struts 2 subproject have version number higher than 2.x? (I think
Can Struts [implied: 1] have version numbers higher than 1.x?
(theoretically yes, but that would be bizzare)
On 6/28/06, Bob Lee wrote:
+1 for Struts 2.0

On 6/28/06, Don Brown wrote:

With the departure of Struts Shale, I think it is time we return to
idea of
Struts as a single, unified framework. While I had hoped we could do this
including Shale, everyone involved felt Shale deserved its own
project and
I'm adjusting my original Struts 2.0 proposal to simply rename
Action as

The ramifications of such a renaming up for discussion:
1. Struts Action 1.3 becomes Struts 1.3 and Struts Action 2.0becomes
Struts 2.0
2. We rename the
directory as,
top level directories the same
3. The org.apache.struts.action2 package becomes
4. action.* and struts-action.* configuration files become
5. The SAF acronym in the documentation would return to Struts

Given all the product naming changes in the last few years (much of which
was my
fault, I admit), I'd like to have these changes decided on soon, so we can
on to getting Struts 2.0 out the door.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs.Try it free.

"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions



site design / logo © 2018 Grokbase