[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-274?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12703599#action_12703599 ]
Hugo Palma commented on TAP5-274: --------------------------------- All the services that relate to the old ApplicationState concept weren't renamed accordingly. I've created a new issue for that: TAP5-669 > Application State Object is a misleading term; rename @ApplicationState to > @SessionState > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: TAP5-274 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-274 > Project: Tapestry 5 > Issue Type: Improvement > Reporter: Geoff Callender > Assignee: Howard M. Lewis Ship > Fix For: 5.1.0.4 > > > This is a record of a discussion that went on in the mailing list on 16-18 > Sep 2008. I proposed that the term ApplicationStateObject caused confusion. > Some agreed but not all. Regardless, the discussion threw up some > interesting food for thought, so I've captured it here for further > consideration. > Here's the e-mail that kicked it off. > From: geoff.callender.jumpst...@gmail.com > Subject: T5: ApplicationStateObject is misleading > Date: 16 September 2008 9:06:12 PM > To: us...@tapestry.apache.org > We want Tapestry to be as natural as possible for newcomers, so it's > important to have terminology that is not misleading. Right now might be the > last chance to tidy some of these up before T5.0 goes final. > One term that I believe many people find misleading is ApplicationState. The > problem is that it implies it will make an object available across the whole > application, ie. application-scoped; which is not its purpose. > The doco says that ASOs "are unique to an individual user, not shared between > users", which is not quite right, either. > The standard usage is to tie an object's scope to that of a web session, so > maybe we should put "session" in the name? Eg. > @SessionScoped > @SessionShared > @ShareAcrossSession > It is important to understand that the term "session" here is NOT a reference > to the persistence mechanism, but a reference to the scope. > Alternatively, let's keep it really obvious with this: > @StateObject > with the understanding that the default persistence strategy is "session". > What do others think? Are you happy with ApplicationState? > Geoff > The discussion continued on these 2 threads: > * http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.tapestry.user/65601/focus=65601 > * http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.tapestry.user/65638/focus=65638 -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.