Okay, created the tickets. *ConfigurationProvider loading mechanism*
https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2192 *Extensionless URLs*Don, it looks like you covered most of this. Did you add support for "index actions"? Smart URLs handles these like this:
URL = http://www.example.com/foo 1. First check for action named foo in namespace / 2. Send redirect to http://www.example.com/foo/ URL = http://www.example.com/foo/ 1. Check for action named index in namespace /fooThis is pretty standard handling by most J2EE and HTTP containers and that's why I did it like that. The Smart URLs configuration provider sets all of this up ahead of time based on what actions it finds in the classpath.
*Pluggable FilterDispatcher* https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2193 -bp Don Brown wrote:
Could you translate these ideas into JIRA tickets and mark them against 2.1? After I finish with the XWork refactoring, I'd like to work on making the configuration providers pluggable, because as you said, it really opens up some interesting possibilities. It is kinda tricky as you have a chicken-egg situation with providers that create plugins which create providers, so patches would be very welcome :) Don On 9/12/07, Brian Pontarelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Well, the configuration provider is kinda a pain right now. I started a thread a while back about making configuration providers pluggable via the struts-plugin.xml file. I think it sorta died because you can use init parameters to setup providers in web.xml. In addition, if you want to use the extensionless support as well as all the index support of the plugin it requires a completely different filter, but it would be much nicer to have everything just plug-in and run with as little configuration as possible. If we keep it a plugin then I would suggest removing zero-config from core so that they don't conflict. I'd probably also want to rework the DispatcherFilter to make it more pluggable so that the majority of the work is from injections and then it can be changed without modifying the web.xml. Lastly, the configuration providers need to be easier to setup. This would probably require a more robust configuration mechanism that would pre-inject configuration providers and then inject the rest of the container. However, all that said, I think this should be in core. The beauty of frameworks like Rails and Grails is that they give all the conventions right out of the box. I feel like Struts should try to strive to match the ease of these other frameworks. Otherwise, it requires the users to actually know that the plugin exists, go find it, install it and then learn it all. -bp Don Brown wrote: The reason the zero config stuff is in core is mainly because it requires a configuration provider, which cannot be plugged in via a struts plugin. Is there any other technical reason that this should be in core? Don On 9/11/07, Musachy Barroso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: IMO this should be a "core" feature of struts 2. musachy On 9/10/07, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hmm...along those lines, could SmartURL be Codebehind 2.0? As for 2.1, I'm working on a huge patch to xwork 2.1 that will, among other things, make OGNL pluggable and fully migrate the code to container injection (no statics!). I should be done sometime this week. Don On 9/11/07, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Why wait? People using Struts 2.0.x could use it now. Struts 2.1.x could be out next week, or next month, or next year. There's really no telling. I'm not sure what "rolling it into the core" means. If it means putting the source into the Struts-Core JAR, then I'd probably be opposed. Personally, I'd like to keep rolling things out of the core and distribute as much as possible in the form of plugins. Ultimately, there should be nothing in the core that doesn't *need* to be in the core. My thought would be to include SmartURLs in Struts 2.1.x as the successor to the CodeBehind plugin. -Ted. On 9/10/07, Musachy Barroso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: +1 for waiting and rolling it into core, it could be available for 2.1 musachy On 9/10/07, Brian Pontarelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I was planning on release 1.0 of SmartURLs in the near future and doing some announcements to the user lists and some other locations. However, should I wait on that if favor of rolling this back into core, or should I go ahead? Thoughts? -bp --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] -- "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
