Re: [VOTE] Struts 1.3.5 Quality

2006-07-24 Thread Hubert Rabago
I found these issues: 1.) ForwardConfig inheritance doesn't work when trying to inherit global forwards. There's code to handle it within the config objects, but they're not being triggered at app startup. 2.) Arbitrary properties don't get copied when creating ActionRedirect objects based on

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
head-slap/ :) You mean we should have release notes too ? * http://confluence.twdata.org/display/WW/Release+Notes+2.0.0 Anyone trying the snapshot may want to watch this page for updates. Contributions to the Release Notes or Migration Guide are welcome. -Ted. On 7/23/06, Matt Raible [EMAIL

Re: Portlet App and Ant (was Re: Would like to remove Ant build from Struts 2)

2006-07-24 Thread tm jee
If so, maybe the best thing to provide is a portlet wrapper that can work with an s2 app (similar to MyFacesGenericPortlet for MyFaces). Then let the portal vendors provide the deployment script. From my limited knowledge of Portlets, I think this is what Struts2 / WebWork is doing.

Re: Portlet App and Ant (was Re: Would like to remove Ant build from Struts 2)

2006-07-24 Thread tm jee
About the ant build that creating a skeleton for various portlet container, what if we build a maven arcetype specific for each of the portlet container? Maybe, mvn archetype:create .. portlet-liferay-archetype-starter will create a template/skeleton for liferay portal, just like what we

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread tm jee
Hi Matt, Is there a repo/artifactId/groupId I can use to start testing this. Ted just pointed this out to me. :-) Its at http://people.apache.org/builds/struts/2.0.x/ Is there any documentation of what's changed in order to upgrade from WebWork 2.2 to Struts 2.0? Ted wrote up somthing about

Re: [s2] Snippet Macro

2006-07-24 Thread Patrick Lightbody
The snippet binary is attached with a comment indicating the source and date. Our snippet macro is a lot more advanced than the one you linked to. It is based on that one, however. - Posted via Jive Forums

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Patrick Lightbody
Sounds good to me, provided everyone is aware that 2.0.1 and 2.0.2 will likely have some large changes. - Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=38227messageID=75314#75314

Re: Portlet App and Ant (was Re: Would like to remove Ant build from Struts 2)

2006-07-24 Thread Greg Reddin
On Jul 24, 2006, at 9:47 AM, tm jee wrote: About the ant build that creating a skeleton for various portlet container, what if we build a maven arcetype specific for each of the portlet container? Maybe, mvn archetype:create .. portlet-liferay-archetype-starter will create a

Re: Portlet App and Ant (was Re: Would like to remove Ant build from Struts 2)

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
On 7/24/06, Greg Reddin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Honestly, I don't know what the WebWork approach has been in the past. I think with Struts, we've just provided helper documentation for those kinds of things. There's a portlet tutorial here: *

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
On 7/23/06, Bob Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If we want to tag now, the new API will have to wait for 3.0. I think we are reaching the point where if we still want to make large changes for 2.0, we need to make them now, or make them in 2.1. AFAIC, we can open 2.1 as soon as we have a stable

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Jason Carreira
On 7/23/06, Bob Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If we want to tag now, the new API will have to wait for 3.0. I think we are reaching the point where if we still want to make large changes for 2.0, we need to make them now, or make them in 2.1. AFAIC, we can open 2.1 as soon as we have a

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Don Brown
Now wait a minute - what happened to our alpha releases? In a more traditional scheme, you would have 2.0 alpha and 2.0 alpha 1, which could contain basically anything you want. The clear alpha designation indicates that big changes are in progress and this is more of a milestone release to

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
It's not about the numbering system; it's about the August people like to bandy about. Realistically, if we are going to have anything like a stable release in the August timeframe, we need to feature lock now, so that we can test and document what we already got. I'm not against the new API,

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Wendy Smoak
On 7/24/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * http://confluence.twdata.org/display/WW/Release+Notes+2.0.0 From the release notes: * Java 1.5 is required to build the Struts 2 distribution from source, but Java 1.4 is targeted for the binary JARs. The struts2-parent pom is targetting

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Jason Carreira
I don't often reply to messages on these lists, but I feel like I have to offer a (relatively) outside perspective here. There's been a lot of confusion external to apache about what's going on with Struts. With Shale moving to a TLP, that's helped, but I think a lot of people

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
On 7/24/06, Tim Fennell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's been a lot of confusion external to apache about what's going on with Struts. With Shale moving to a TLP, that's helped, but I think a lot of people are still confused about exactly what Struts 2.0 will be. Shale graduating to top-level

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
On 7/24/06, Jason Carreira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +1 to this. This is what we talked about at JavaOne, I thought... We can have pre-releases, where it's ok for people to get their feet wet, but if we want the big API changes we've talked about, and I think we do, then we can't release a

[s2] RetroWeaver or RetroTranslator

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
As Wendy pointed out, I missed the step where we convert the bits from 1.5 to 1.4 using RetroWeaver or RetroTranslator. Any preferences? Or, should we post both, and see what happens? -Ted. * http://retroweaver.sourceforge.net/ * http://retrotranslator.sourceforge.net/

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Tim Fennell
It's a gentle slide for WebWork 2.2 developers now, and some of us would like to keep it that way. Forever? Or just for the Struts 2.0 release? Because if you guys are talking about making sweeping changes some time ... can you keep doing this? Now, if the current 2.0.0 doesn't represent

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Don Brown
These are all good points, and I'm happy to see the diverse involvement. I'm wondering if perhaps we should reclassify the 2.0.0 release. To some, it signifies the next great foundation to build web apps upon, and by doing so, sweeps clean the legacies of Struts and WebWork. When I look at

Re: [s2] RetroWeaver or RetroTranslator

2006-07-24 Thread Don Brown
I think we should follow Tim's lead by using RetroTranslator, however, it shouldn't hold up the 2.0.0 release. Don Ted Husted wrote: As Wendy pointed out, I missed the step where we convert the bits from 1.5 to 1.4 using RetroWeaver or RetroTranslator. Any preferences? Or, should we post

Re: Portlet App and Ant (was Re: Would like to remove Ant build from Struts 2)

2006-07-24 Thread Don Brown
I'd love to be able to use a Maven plugin, like the Jetty one, to easily test the portlet w/o any extra installation. Using 'mvn jetty6:run-war is just too handy. This is one of my many personal todo projects :) Don Ted Husted wrote: On 7/24/06, Greg Reddin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
But to me, making sweeping changes to the core API should not be an option for a long time after 2.0 goes stable. Sure, but why should 2.0 be seen as the end of the road. Not so long ago, only early adopters used the #.0 version of anything, even if shrink-wrapped :) We already know 2.0 won't

Re: Portlet App and Ant (was Re: Would like to remove Ant build from Struts 2)

2006-07-24 Thread Don Brown
This bridge is really what exists today in Struts 2/WebWork 2. You can write an app, test it in Tomcat as a webapp, then run it as a portlet without any code changes. I think what Toby is talking about is helping with the extra configuration files that the different portals require. I think

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Bob Lee
On 7/24/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a gentle slide for WebWork 2.2 developers now, and some of us would like to keep it that way. It will be gentle either way; there's no reason we can't continue to support the existing API in a deprecated fashion. WebWork teams perhaps,

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Bob Lee
On 7/24/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Struts 2.0.x - WebWork transitional releases Struts 2.1.x/3.0.x - The true successor to Struts and WebWork Can number them this way instead? It seems more intuitive. Struts 2.0 alpha/beta x - WebWork transitional releases Struts

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
On 7/24/06, Bob Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/24/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Struts 2.0.x - WebWork transitional releases Struts 2.1.x/3.0.x - The true successor to Struts and WebWork Can number them this way instead? It seems more intuitive. Struts 2.0 alpha/beta x -

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Don Brown
Personally, I would love to, however the Struts PMC has voted successfully to adopt the Tomcat/HTTPD naming scheme, which gives all releases a number [1]. While I am generally one to stir up trouble, this is a case where there was considerable debate, a lot of time was taken, and finally a fair

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Bob Lee
Cool. I didn't realize there was so much process involved. Bob On 7/24/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Personally, I would love to, however the Struts PMC has voted successfully to adopt the Tomcat/HTTPD naming scheme, which gives all releases a number [1]. While I am generally one to

Re: [s2] RetroWeaver or RetroTranslator

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
On 7/24/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we should follow Tim's lead by using RetroTranslator, however, it shouldn't hold up the 2.0.0 release. I could finesse the 2.0.0 distribution, but I wonder if we are going be able to make using RT a standard feature of the Maven assemblies

Re: [s2] RetroWeaver or RetroTranslator

2006-07-24 Thread Don Brown
Yeah, exactly. It will probably involve using the antrun plugin, but unless someone really wants to work on that right now, it'll have to be another entry on the todo list. Don Ted Husted wrote: On 7/24/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we should follow Tim's lead by using

Re: Portlet App and Ant (was Re: Would like to remove Ant build from Struts 2)

2006-07-24 Thread Nils-Helge Garli
On 7/24/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd love to be able to use a Maven plugin, like the Jetty one, to easily test the portlet w/o any extra installation. Using 'mvn jetty6:run-war is just too handy. This is one of my many personal todo projects :) Don I believe the Pluto 1.1

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Hubert Rabago
On 7/24/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -1 on changing the versioning scheme. But, I would be open to something like * Struts 2.0 == WebWork transtional release * Struts 2.1 == new API release * Struts 3.x == phase 2 - the best of breed release ...with pointers on what to consider

Re: Portlet App and Ant (was Re: Would like to remove Ant build from Struts 2)

2006-07-24 Thread Don Brown
Yeah, that is a step, but to really make it useful, it should work without Tomcat and/or Pluto installed anywhere on the hard drive. The Jetty plugin embeds Jetty so that no external files are needed. Don Nils-Helge Garli wrote: On 7/24/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd love to

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Don Brown
+1 Hubert Rabago wrote: On 7/24/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -1 on changing the versioning scheme. But, I would be open to something like * Struts 2.0 == WebWork transtional release * Struts 2.1 == new API release * Struts 3.x == phase 2 - the best of breed release ...with

[s2] Roadmap (was Tag it and Roll it?)

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
I would like to propose a versioning roadmap for Struts 2 and beyond. * 2.0.x series == WebWork transitionary release * 2.1.x series = New API release * 3.x series = Best of breed/Phase 2 release The proposal extends the original Ti proposal by adding a 2.1 series to accomodate the API

Re: [s2] Roadmap (was Tag it and Roll it?)

2006-07-24 Thread Don Brown
I like it. If we can get a functioning implementation of the API in by Monday, it goes in 2.0.x. Bob, please commit anything you have, as I'd like to help in getting the API in there. Don Ted Husted wrote: I would like to propose a versioning roadmap for Struts 2 and beyond. * 2.0.x

Re: [s2] Roadmap (was Tag it and Roll it?)

2006-07-24 Thread Frank W. Zammetti
On Mon, July 24, 2006 4:35 pm, Ted Husted wrote: I would like to propose a versioning roadmap for Struts 2 and beyond. * 2.0.x series == WebWork transitionary release * 2.1.x series = New API release * 3.x series = Best of breed/Phase 2 release What's the reasoning behind jumping from

Re: [s2] Roadmap (was Tag it and Roll it?)

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
On 7/24/06, Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's the reasoning behind jumping from 2.1.x to 3.x? I would have been thinking 2.2(.x) instead of 3.x. Going back to the Ti proposal, phase 2 is intended to be a major jump, not an evolutionary refinement. *

Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Rainer Hermanns
This sounds really helpful for current webwork users and the upcoming struts 2.x community. +1 from my side. Lots of efforts are currently taken to address changes and fixes in Struts .x and backport them to webwork 2.2.3 and vice versa. Therefore we should get out a Struts 2.0 alpha quality

Re: [s2] Roadmap (was Tag it and Roll it?)

2006-07-24 Thread Rainer Hermanns
As soon as webwork 2.2.3 is out I will concentrate my help on Struts 2.0. I want to help in getting the new API implemented ASAP. Rainer I like it. If we can get a functioning implementation of the API in by Monday, it goes in 2.0.x. Bob, please commit anything you have, as I'd like to

Re: svn commit: r423995 [1/2] - /struts/struts2/trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/struts2/views/xslt /

2006-07-24 Thread Rainer Hermanns
Wendy, Ted, I will ask Pat to send in a CLA. Which form does he need to sign? Can you point me to the required CLA form please? tia, Rainer On 7/22/06, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=423995view=rev Log: XSLT Views + XML Mapping + HashMap

Re: svn commit: r423995 [1/2] - /struts/struts2/trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/struts2/views/xslt /

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
There's a link on the licenses page. * http://apache.org/licenses/ It's the same one that committers file. -Ted. On 7/24/06, Rainer Hermanns [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wendy, Ted, I will ask Pat to send in a CLA. Which form does he need to sign? Can you point me to the required CLA form

DefaultActionMapper compatablity switch [was: Re: [s2] Roadmap (was Tag it and Roll it?)]

2006-07-24 Thread David Evans
On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 16:35 -0400, Ted Husted wrote: I would like to propose a versioning roadmap for Struts 2 and beyond. * 2.0.x series == WebWork transitionary release * 2.1.x series = New API release * 3.x series = Best of breed/Phase 2 release The proposal extends the original Ti

RE: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?

2006-07-24 Thread Anders Steinlein
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted Husted Sent: 24. juli 2006 21:53 To: Struts Developers List Subject: Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it? -1 on changing the versioning scheme. But, I would be open to something like

Re: DefaultActionMapper compatablity switch [was: Re: [s2] Roadmap (was Tag it and Roll it?)]

2006-07-24 Thread Don Brown
David Evans wrote: I was looking in DefaultActionMapper and am wondering about the compatibilityMode switch functionality. In getMapping compatibilityMode is used to see whether to check for the ! method idiom. I assume this is because it will eventually be removed because wildcard mappings make

Re: DefaultActionMapper compatablity switch [was: Re: [s2] Roadmap (was Tag it and Roll it?)]

2006-07-24 Thread David Evans
On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 15:15 -0700, Don Brown wrote: David Evans wrote: I was looking in DefaultActionMapper and am wondering about the compatibilityMode switch functionality. In getMapping compatibilityMode is used to see whether to check for the ! method idiom. I assume this is because

Re: DefaultActionMapper compatablity switch [was: Re: [s2] Roadmap (was Tag it and Roll it?)]

2006-07-24 Thread Bob Lee
I think method:foo might still make sense. It's orthogonal to path mappings. Maybe. Bob On 7/24/06, David Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 15:15 -0700, Don Brown wrote: David Evans wrote: I was looking in DefaultActionMapper and am wondering about the

Re: DefaultActionMapper compatablity switch

2006-07-24 Thread Frank W. Zammetti
Potentially simple solution: a config switch to turn this functionality on (the ability to specify method in the URL). It'd be off by default. That way everyone can be happy... security hole closed, but easy to activate for those who want it. Frank Don Brown wrote: The problem is that

Re: DefaultActionMapper compatablity switch

2006-07-24 Thread Bob Lee
I agree it's a security concern, and it still is if the developer uses a path pattern, except in the latter case, it's harder for us to secure. I was hoping we'd store which methods are OK to invoke in the session or sign them or something. For example, we could have tags like this: s:link

Re: [s2] RetroWeaver or RetroTranslator

2006-07-24 Thread Brett Porter
From those that have been using it, I've heard retrotranslator was more workable for this scenario. We have plugins for both retroweaver and retrotranslator at mojo.codehaus.org: http://mojo.codehaus.org/retrotranslator-maven-plugin/ Jason Dillon has been working on making that more functional

Re: DefaultActionMapper compatablity switch

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
On 7/24/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem is that prefix allows anyone to specify the method to be called on the action through the URL, any URL. I'd argue it is a security concern, so the developer should have to work at explicitly allowing a method to be arbitrarily called.

Re: [s2] RetroWeaver or RetroTranslator

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
On 7/24/06, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there a JIRA issue I can watch for this, or should I create one? You could create one and, for extra credit, link it to the build issue. :) -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: DefaultActionMapper compatablity switch

2006-07-24 Thread David Evans
If something like this was implemented, I'd hope that there would be a way for those of us who use JSTL to still be able to specify method names. I understand the security concerns, but the flexibility is far more important to me. If a user wants to protect themselves, they can make methods they

Struts release timelines (Was: RE: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?)

2006-07-24 Thread Anders Steinlein
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted Husted Sent: 25. juli 2006 00:45 To: Struts Developers List Subject: Re: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it? On 7/24/06, Anders Steinlein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IMHO, all the users,

Re: DefaultActionMapper compatablity switch

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
On 7/24/06, David Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I understand the security concerns, but the flexibility is far more important to me. If a user wants to protect themselves, they can make methods they don't want run by xwork private. Or maybe have an explicit list of param

Re: DefaultActionMapper compatablity switch

2006-07-24 Thread Bob Lee
I'd much rather annotate methods which can be called than specify them in XML. Also, this doesn't pose much of a security risk in practice as it only applies to public, no-arg methods which return String in actions. Bob On 7/24/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/24/06, Don Brown

Re: DefaultActionMapper compatablity switch

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
On 7/24/06, Bob Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd much rather annotate methods which can be called than specify them in XML. Feel free to do so then. Also, this doesn't pose much of a security risk in practice as it only applies to public, no-arg methods which return String in actions.

Struts, Dyna Forms and indexed properties

2006-07-24 Thread Damien Gallagher
All I require to use Struts Dyna forms and indexed properties for one of my college projects. At the moment this is proving more difficult than i thought it would. Does anyone have any code that i can following in regards struts dyna forms Any help would be greatly appreciated Kind Regards

Re: DefaultActionMapper compatablity switch

2006-07-24 Thread Jason Carreira
I'd much rather annotate methods which can be called than specify them in XML. Also, this doesn't pose much of a security risk in practice as it only applies to public, no-arg methods which return String in actions. Bob No-arg, yes, but it will convert anything else to a String on

Re: Struts release timelines (Was: RE: [s2] Struts 2.0.0 - Tag it and Roll it?)

2006-07-24 Thread Ted Husted
On 7/24/06, Anders Steinlein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didn't mean to nag or sound negative, but I'm glad you plan to do better. It isn't really the time between new features and bug fixes that bother me much, it's the time they take to finalize and release. The latest 1.3 releases have, to my

Re: DefaultActionMapper compatablity switch

2006-07-24 Thread David Evans
On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 21:27 -0400, Ted Husted wrote: On 7/24/06, David Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I understand the security concerns, but the flexibility is far more important to me. If a user wants to protect themselves, they can make methods they don't want run by xwork private. Or