I'd be fine with a "shared" module, as long as releases could be quicker and
easier. As I've previously mentioned, Struts releases are really a pain due to
lack of committer support and a broken release process, and I certainly don't
want to put a roadblock in the path of a stable Struts 2.0 release.
Don
Craig McClanahan wrote:
On 7/5/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Good question. Here are the options of the top of my head:
- Jakarta Commons project
- Put it in Struts 1.x, since Struts 2 will probably have 1 has a dep
for
migration code
- Create new Struts Commons
- Just have two copies of the code
FWIW, the MyFaces folks have gone through the same sort of discussion
recently, trying to decide whether/how to share code between the JSF
implementation and the component classes. The hardest part of the whole
thing is actually synchronizing releases of the helper classes, since both
framework versions would have dependencies on the common stuff. They ended
up with a variation of the third approach -- a "shared" module in the
MyFaces repository that both things could depend on.
Craig
To be honest, I lean towards the last option, unless the code is large
enough to
warrant the first. For example, Struts 1 has WildcardHelper, but so does
XWork
2.0 (used by Struts 2) and it all came from Cocoon. Cocoon recently
rewrote the
class, so I'll need to bring over the changes into those two new
projects.
Sure, that is a bit of work, but not in comparison to starting a new
project
just for that class.
Don
Paul Benedict wrote:
> A thought occured to me today. If we ever want to share code between
struts 1 and struts 2c (ie: locale resolution), having the
org.apache.struts package structure being the neutral place makes sense,
with action (1.x) and action2 (2.x) being specific implementations.
>
> Well, not that the renaming is done, I think we have no normal way of
sharing code across packages. Thoughts?
>
> -- Paul
>
> Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 7/1/06, Don Brown
(JIRA) wrote:
>> Rename Struts Action 1 to Struts 1
>
> If we are using "struts1" and "struts2" for the repository folders
> (which is fine with me), why are we using "1.x" and "2.0" for the
> website folders?
>
> * http://struts.apache.org/1.x/
> * http://struts.apache.org/2.0/
>
> In the view of "convention over configuration", I feel we we should
> work toward using a consistent set of conventions across tools. If
> there is not a technical reason why we need to use symbols, I'd like
> to use "struts1" and "struts2" for the website folders.
>
> -Ted.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Want to be your own boss? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
