> ... and scoping at a session level even opens up new interesting > possibilities. >
Interesting indeed! I could be wrong of course, but seems like most of the ideas bounced around the past couple of days have been ideas that have been around for some time already. It seems like it's only a matter of which ones will be chosen by Joe, Don, and any other committer participating. I think this idea here by Don is the first one mentioned that I haven't heard before and certainly could put a different spin on the combined form+action object. What scenario it's useful for, I don't know yet. I guess I was just awakened by the fresh idea. :) Hubert On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 08:48:31 -0800, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joe Germuska wrote: > <snip /> > > We can create an interface for Action w/o deprecating Action itself. I > don't have a problem keeping Action around (in fact, since we are > sticking with the 1.x naming, we pretty much have to), but we should > take this opportunity and remove its dependency in Struts core. Action > would still be around for those that want to use it as their base class. > > FWIW, I think Frank's idea of supporting POJO's as actions is the best. > The JSF model of "action" is, IMO, the way to go: > 1. It is a POJO that doesn't have to extend or implement anything > 2. It can have properties for simple pages that don't need separate forms > 3. It can be scoped so this silly "threadsafe" thing can go away, and > scoping at a session level even opens up new interesting possibilities. > > Don > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
