Apache Terminates Struts 1

twofishy writes "Struts 1, the venerable Java MVC Web framework, has reached End Of Life status, the Apache foundation has announced. In a sense, the move simply formalises what has already happened, as the Struts team have focused their efforts on version 2; the last release of Struts 1 was version 1.3.10 in December 2008. The change of status does mean however that, whilst the code and documentation will still be available, no further security patches or bug fixes will be issued."

Comments

Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does Struts catapult Java from a terrible server side language to a disastrous framework?

I'm just asking... Java is far too shitty for me so I don't really know.

Re:Java?

[rubycodez]

no, IBM Websphere does that

Re:Java?

[Gr8Apes]

Struts 2 is far worse. I've personally not seen it adopted anywhere. If the choice is to move away from Struts 1, it will generally be to SpringMVC or something similar, or that general horror known as JSF. Struts 2 was so bad, it doesn't even get a second look from anyone I know. Even Tapestry was better.

That aside, nice troll. Guess you run with that rock solid Ruby, or maybe that super efficient and secure PHP?

Re:Java?

[davelnewton]

Speaking of trolls. In any case, defend your statement. There's *nothing* in S2 that's worse than S1. It's pretty similar to Spring MVC in functionality. I have no idea how you could come to the conclusion that S1 is better.

Re:Java?

[Gr8Apes]

having knowledge of more than 20 companies that all used Struts at one time, some still do, I'd say that 0 percent adoption is telling. Several went JSF, others started using SpringMVC. Anecdotal, I know, but in my entire circle of people I know, not a single one has used Struts 2 beyond a distasteful POC, provided they got past the initial documentation.

Follow that with your own comment - it may not be worse, but it's not better. And that was enough to arrive DOA for many.

Knitting

[Anonymous Coward]

I like to get my knitting done whilst watching the telly.

What?

[ArchieBunker]

Does anyone use whatever this article is talking about?

Re:What?

[hcs_$reboot]

Does anyone use whatever this article is talking about?

No. It's terminated. RTFA

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe not much recently, but a few years ago it was very popular. Out of the 104 resumes I have for open Java positions, 47 of them have the word struts on their resume. Apache is screwing over quite a few people with this decision to drop a popular framework.

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

They have not dropped it. They're focusing their resources on a newer version. Use the newer version.

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

It has the word Java in it. Sure somebody used it. Several managers probably even fattened their paycheck buying it.

Re:What?

[Earthquake Retrofit]

Does anyone use whatever this article is talking about?

And would it have killed someone to type out model MVC (Model View Controller) at least once? I still don't know what it is, of course...

Re:What?

[cdrudge]

Apache is screwing over just as many people as PHP screwed over when they EOL-ed the PHP 4.4.x branch, or .Net 1.1 or 2.0 when mainstream support ended.

People can continue to use the outdated version, but it wasn't supported. It's not as if all applications ceased to operate, just that if you haven't moved on to developing Struts 2 apps by now, then you need to bite the bullet and switch.

Re:What?

[RichardJenkins]

Yes. It wasn't always terminated.

Re: What?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Apache+struts+overview

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone use whatever this article is talking about?

No. It's terminated. RTFA

But it can still be used.

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

Although Struts 2 is a complete rewrite, it's backward compatible with Struts 1. Developers have had years to start making the switch.

Re:What?

[VGPowerlord]

It's just Struts 1 that is being EOLed. Given that Struts 2 was 6 years old in February, developers had plenty of time to switch to Struts 2. The current release is 2.3.12.

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

.Net 2.0 hasn't fully left the "mainstream support" category yet.

The .Net Framework v2.0 has, but the .Net Runtime v2.0, via .Net Framework v3.5 SP1, is considered to be part of Windows 7 and will receive mainstream support until January 13, 2015, when Windows 7 RTM mainstream support ends.

For those that are scratching their heads due to unfamiliarity with .Net's version number screwiness:
- .Net CLR 1.0 runs .Net FX 1.0-1.1
- .Net CLR 2.0 runs .Net FX 2.0-3.5SP1
- .Net CLR 4.0 runs .Net FX 4.0-4.5

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

And would it have killed someone to type out model MVC (Model View Controller) at least once?

Yes, probably.

MVC is one of those things you're either "in to" or it's a pain in the ass.

Those that like MVC tend to be:
1) anal retentive,
2) sloppy coders that know they need enforced structure, or
3) so green they need mowing.

Everyone else is:
1) a sloppy coder and proud of it,
2) a sloppy coder and clueless, or
3) actually competent and doesn't need any ridiculous hand-holding.

In the words of the inventor of Java, "youKids.getOffMyLawn();"

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

just that if you haven't moved on to developing Struts 2 apps by now, then you need to bite the bullet and switch.

There is at least one seriously gigantic piece of crap software stack for a major enterprise still running Struts 1. (This company rakes in tens of billions of dollars per year.) Fortunately, their core business isn't software, but given that they are still stuck on Struts 1, you can imagine just what kind of soul-sucking experience it was to work there.

Fortunately, I wasn't there very long.

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

You should put that into perspective, seriously. "I'm not going to spend my free time working on a steaming pile of shit that is PHP 4" isn't exactly screwing people over.

Re: What?

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't know the TLA MVC is? And you ate reading /. Seriously? I'd be too embarrassed to admit such a thing. The thing about journalistic courtesy is it works by ascertaining who your audience is - in this case technical people - and writing to them. As a result you might reasonably assume knowledge of a few basic acronyms - RAM, ROM, MVC, CPU and so on - and not bother to spell them out.

Re:What?

[Chrisq]

Although Struts 2 is a complete rewrite, it's backward compatible with Struts 1.

Rubbish, it has entirely different concepts, architecture configurations and just about everything. There are migration tools, but these are far from automatic.

Developers have had years to start making the switch.

True, but many haven't because if you have a website in maintainance mode (a small number of upgrade and changes) it is hard to get approval for an upgrade if what you are using is still supported. I am actually pleased that it is now at end of life, we have been wanting to evaluate new frameworks and upgrade for ages but not given the budget.

Re:What?

[dropadrop]

True, but many haven't because if you have a website in maintainance mode (a small number of upgrade and changes) it is hard to get approval for an upgrade if what you are using is still supported. I am actually pleased that it is now at end of life, we have been wanting to evaluate new frameworks and upgrade for ages but not given the budget.

And they will never get approval unless the product goes to EOL. Above this, the longer it takes to lose support, the less likely there will be somebody who knows the system in case and the more work an update will take.

Re:What?

[benjfowler]

Yes.

And not sorry to see it gone.

Struts really WAS a piece of shit.

Brain-damaged design. Mindlessly insane amounts of boilerplate. Dreadful diagnostics. Lengthy edit-compile-test cycle. Absolutely terrible productivity that nearly cost me a job once (was told to use it, and suffered through its productivity-sapping utter shiteness).

EVERY web framework designer, when confronted with a design decision thinks to himself: "how does Struts 1 do it? Do the completely opposite". It's really that bad.

It was innovative compared to JSPs and servlets, but that's about it.

Re:What?

[benjfowler]

But why would you, unless you were stuck maintaining a legacy application?

I'd rather chew razor blades than work on a Struts application again.

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Given that Struts 2 was 6 years old in February, developers had plenty of time to switch to Struts 2.

I don't think you have never made professional software development in healthcare, banking or commerce. In those fields, the developers don't just "switch to Struts 2". In fact, in most cases, there will never be a switch.

Re:What?

[Gr8Apes]

If any of my clients using Struts 1 are going to drop it, they won't be going to Struts 2. None have in the past either, and Struts 2 isn't even mentioned in the current group.

Re:What?

[Medievalist]

Given that Struts 2 was 6 years old in February, developers had plenty of time to switch to Struts 2.

I don't think you have never made professional software development in healthcare, banking or commerce. In those fields, the developers don't just "switch to Struts 2". In fact, in most cases, there will never be a switch

Your comment is 10 years or more out of date.

If you're HIPAA/HITECH or SOX regulated and you're running EOL'd software, don't expect to pass your next audit.

And if your plan is to lie to the auditors, well, be aware that the CEO is unlikely to be the one who goes to jail - it's more likely to be you, regardless of what your boss might tell you now.

Re:What?

[deKernel]

So just how is Apache "screwing over" people on this one? They have a new version of Struts available and focusing on that. They don't have unlimited resources so they have to decide what is supported with bug fixes versus what is not.

Re:What?

[davelnewton]

Nonsense.

S1 hasn't seen an update in quite some time--nobody is maintaining it. Making it official changes nothing on the ground.

No S1 resources are going away, and people will still answer questions about it on the mailing list and SO, just like now, even though nobody should be using it for anything other than legacy support.

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

No all Dev's embark on the "change for change's sake" bandwagon. Some of us like it when things are done.

If there was only an easy way to look things up ..

[John Bokma]

In that case why don't you just look it up? That's what I do nearly each time I encounter something new. And I do learn something that way... If it's worthy enough to bitch about it's certainly worthy enough to look it up, right?

Re:If there was only an easy way to look things up

[Earthquake Retrofit]

I did look it up of course. And I didn't like the sound of it, so I didn't look further into it. Journalistic courtesy would have saved me a little time. I'm not angry and I'm sorry it sounded that way.

Clarifications

[Anonymous Coward]

> the Struts team have focused their efforts on version 2

- Struts2 and Struts (1) are not two versions of the same framework. Struts2 is a wholly different framework, basically a merge of Struts and Webworks, with more from the later.

- The development of Struts2 is not very active either. The last releases (last two or three years, perhaps more) have been mostly security patches and small issue-fixes.

Re:Clarifications

[Anonymous Coward]

What the heck are you talking about? Struts 2.3.12 was released some weeks ago, and they are about to release Struts 2.3.14

Apache, UGH!

[oldhack]

Apache is the Oracle of FOS. They deliberately omit/ruin documentation and dev process for consulting business.

Re:Apache, UGH!

[Anonymous Coward]

The Apache Commons libraries are pretty good.

Re:Apache, UGH!

[Anonymous Coward]

No, those pretty much all suck too. There used to be one project in commons that was decent, but the HttpClient got promoted out and now there's really nothing of value left. Every project there has an alternative that's less buggy, more performant and better designed. Hell...half of the stuff there is covered better by Google's Guava library.

Re:Apache, UGH!

[benjfowler]

Have you seen Maven? Whoever got the idea that quality documentation could be automatically generated deserves a punishment beating.

Discussion TFA/TFS is perhaps a proxy for

[Anonymous Coward]

What transactional application framework would you use today (April 2013) for your web-scale application, if you were architect or similar responsible position in a startup, with a small team of developers but no legacy code to worry about? And why pick that over the alternatives? Would the answer change if you were employed by a big bank or Fortune 500 company that was willing to shell out for a big bucks platform?

Re:Discussion TFA/TFS is perhaps a proxy for

[VGPowerlord]

What transactional application framework would you use today (April 2013) for your web-scale application,

For Java, the big one these days seems to be Spring.

Re:Discussion TFA/TFS is perhaps a proxy for

[twofishy]

Honestly it doesn't make that much difference these days. Spring and Java EE are both good choices. Java EE needs an app server but there are plenty of free options including Glassfish which is the reference implementation. I'd tend to choose Java EE over Spring because it is easier to "grow" as you need to in my opinion, and I don't think the learning curve is any bigger really. Plus the fact that it is backed by the major vendors means that if you need to tie into a banks MQ Series/CICS/whatever back-end it is that much easier to do. There is pretty much nothing you need to do in enterprise software that Java EE doesn't handle reasonably well with the possible exception of HFT - even in low latency environments Java is a pretty decent choice. 10 years ago I'd have gone the other way mainly because Spring was just so much simpler. These days Spring has got really kind of complex, the two more-or-less have feature parity, and Java EE has got simper, and they've kind of met in the middle. One downside of Java EE is the standard web framework - JSF. Whilst it has its uses for the most part there are simpler options for a "typical" architecture - JSON over REST being presented via JQuery. Spring MVC is a good choice, as is Struts 2.

Re:Discussion TFA/TFS is perhaps a proxy for

[bpkiwi]

One downside of Java EE is the standard web framework - JSF. Whilst it has its uses for the most part there are simpler options for a "typical" architecture - JSON over REST being presented via JQuery. Spring MVC is a good choice, as is Struts 2.

A restful back end driven by an html/js/ajax client is my favorite architecture as well, however if you want to do a server-generated dhtml style application, I would suggest you have a look at Stripes - It's everything that Struts should be (and isn't).

Re:Discussion TFA/TFS is perhaps a proxy for

[hattig]

Apache Wicket for the web UI (bye bye JSPs), and Spring (or Guice) for DI, beans, etc.

Re:Discussion TFA/TFS is perhaps a proxy for

[K. S. Kyosuke]

What transactional application framework would you use today (April 2013) for your web-scale application,

For Java, the big one these days seems to be Spring.

I suppose that "web-scale" means "size of the .war files" in this context?

Re:Discussion TFA/TFS is perhaps a proxy for

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realize that Wickets extends servlet and so all your wicket pages are really jsp's, right?

Re:Discussion TFA/TFS is perhaps a proxy for

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, JSPs compile down into servlets, not the other way around.

Wicket gets rid of JSP files and the mess of taglibs and/or embedded Java logic within JSPs.

Of course it introduces its own difficulties...

What do you call the end of a Java Framework?

[russotto]

Answer: A good start. If I never see another framework which makes you write the same thing three different times in three different ways, and claims it's making things "easier" by doing so, it'll be 15 years too late.

Re:What do you call the end of a Java Framework?

[asylumx]

Technically, typing the same thing three times is a lot easier than coming up with three completely different things to type.

For non-Java users...

[Anonymous Coward]

... Struts is the most appaling MVC framework for web applications ever invented. It is a poor abstraction of the underlying servlet mechanism, it requires a hideously complicated configuration file and the original logic tags were some of the worst ever invented.

Struts 2 is of course polishing a turd.

Re:For non-Java users...

[xenocide2]

Well, Struts 2 was a completely different thing. Why WebWork thought Struts was the right brand to associate with, we'll never know.

Re:For non-Java users...

[benjfowler]

Amen. Vote parent up.

Whoever designed the Struts tag libraries is a stupid cunt who deserves slow torture, followed by slow, lingering death for all the developer productivity he's destroyed over the years.

Re:For non-Java users...

[ggeens]

... Struts is the most appaling MVC framework for web applications ever invented.

Well, it was the first MVC framework. Back in 2000, we were glad we weren't doing plain JSP/Servlet.

Later, we started using newer frameworks. Pretty soon, we noticed we were working several times faster than in Struts.

It is not that as bad as EOL of Window XP.

[jackhatedance]

Struts is open source software that any java developer can fix bugs for themselves. As far as I know, two big companies in my city are using Struts 1 since 10 years ago. They never had a chance to migrate to version 2 because too many code to convert.

Good Riddance

[coder111]

I'm glad. Struts 1 wasn't such a good framework. It was first framework a lot of Java developers used these days, and one of the first frameworks available, and back then there wasn't that much choice. But today we have much more and much better ones. If you are still using Struts 1 in this day and age, you're doing something wrong... Even for legacy systems, there was plenty of time to refactor.

--Coder

Not quite

[Chrisq]

Does Struts catapult Java from a terrible server side language to a disastrous framework?

I'm just asking... Java is far too shitty for me so I don't really know.

No, it only goes part way. For that you need Struts 2

Re:If there was only an easy way to look things up

[K. S. Kyosuke]

In that case why don't you just look it up? That's what I do nearly each time I encounter something new.

Technology from 1970's isn't "new" anymore.

Re:If there was only an easy way to look things up

[John Bokma]

"New" as in "new to me", of course.

read that as "sluts"

[Anonymous Coward]

Article was a little different than what I expected. :)