There's a tension between large-scale maintainability and small-scale "hurry!" apps.
I think it's important that S2 can do both, and our documentation should reflect its suitability for each style, and provide insight and/or mechanisms into transitioning between the two (struts.xml from annotations, anyone, to convert between apps writ small and large?) and the various advantages/drawbacks of each. Dave On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Chris Pratt <thechrispr...@gmail.com> wrote: > -1. I find programming by religion (or convention or whatever you want to > call it when the computer tries to guess what you mean) to be a very bad > long term decision. For small programs it works out fine, but for anything > with any scale you start to run into unimagined problems because someone > named something inconveniently. I feel making that part of the main flow of > a framework as important as Struts sends the wrong message about Struts' > main purpose, which should be making enterprise class web applications. But > then again, that's just one man's humble rantings. > (*Chris*) > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 3:03 AM, Johannes Geppert <jo...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Only a thought, what are you thinking about moving the convention plugin >> into >> core? >> >> Many People don't know the convention plugin and offen i hear that Struts2 >> is >> an old fashion XML configuration MVC Framework. >> >> Johannes >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://struts.1045723.n5.nabble.com/Roadmap-for-2-3-tp3609943p3695351.html >> Sent from the Struts - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@struts.apache.org >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@struts.apache.org
