Re: [OS-webwork] Programmatic configuration
Jason Carreira wrote: -Original Message- From: Rickard Öberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Ah, ok, I looked at the interface you sent in email, and true, it doesn't describe it well. But, I would argue that the interface should be split, as I described in my first email on programmatic configuration. You'd typically have 3 players involved: 1 Some configuration repository which the application can use to get configuration settings. This is the RuntimeConfiguration Interface. Both this and ProgrammableConfiguration are implemented by ConfigurationManager right now. This uses a very flat data structure. You call getActionConfig(String namespace, String name) to get an ActionConfig. The Package structures, etc. are stripped away as they're only used to provide defaults and inheritance. Why is an interface needed here? I thought this was just a singleton thingy which the app can query. Are there several implementation possibilities, and if so, why? 2 Some configuration bundle containing settings that have been loaded. This mostly just have get/set methods. This is ProgrammableConfiguration. It also has a reload() method to tell it to get the new configuration from 3, below, and buildRuntimeConfiguration(), which can be thought of as a "save" method which tells it to generate the runtime configuration from the hierarchical configuration structures which can be programmatically tweaked. IMHO that's backwards. This thing should be a stupid data holder, nothing more. It's 3) that determines when the data should be reloaded. 3 Various loaders which read configuration files (e.g. XML) and create configuration bundles and register these with the repository. This is ConfigurationFactory, which can have one object implementing Configuration registered with it (by default this is DefaultConfiguration). That's backwards. It should be possible to have N implementations, one for each kind of configuration, simultaneously. Remember, an application may be created by merging several subapps, and each subapp may have its own way to read configuration. The total app must be able to handle this. With only One way to read configuration that is not possible. When ConfigurationManager.reload() is called, it calls ConfigurationFactory.getConfiguration().init(this) to tell the Configuration to load its configuration and register the configuration params with the ProgrammableConfiguration it's passed (ConfigurationManager). DefaultConfiguration starts at init() and loads the xwork.xml file, parsing through it building up data structures and registering them with the ProgrammableConfiguration it is passed. This is backwards, because how would you know when to call reload()? The only entity which can know this are the individual ConfigurationFactories. It then becomes possible to configure the app at runtime without using 3 at all, since 2 can be created programmatically. Instances of 2 can also be serialized and sent around in a system without much trouble. Hadn't thought of sending serialized configuration objects around. Why would you want to do this? Why not? :-) Example: using JMX to configure. Using a Java client to configure. Storing serialized configuration in a database. Etc. etc. Right now what happens is that ConfigurationManager has a static instance which is initialized at class initialization and calls reload to get the Configuration from the ConfigurationFactory. See above. That's the wrong approach. Do you see why? /Rickard -- Rickard Öberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senselogic Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
[OS-webwork] Commands implemented
I've just checked in the command code to xwork. It allows you to do this: 123 bar 456 foo The command here creates a new alias in the runtime configuration and inherits properties from the enclosing action. It will also call the supplied method. Actions are not required to supply a method, although they can as well. If no method is supplied for an Action, it defaults to calling action.execute(). For now Actions must still implement this interface, although this can easily be removed and the object can be cast to Action before calling execute(). This should be the last major change to configuration. The only other thing I want to do, and I just thought of this while I was writing this, is to make name optional on the Action and have it not create a runtime ActionConfig for the action itself if there is no name, although you could have several commands underneath the action which would be configured. I also refactored the names of the config classes. Configuration -> ConfigurationProvider ConfigurationFactory -> ConfigurationProviderFactory DefaultConfiguration -> DefaultConfigurationProvider SimpleConfiguration -> SimpleConfigurationProvider I've also created 2 new classes in the ActionConfig class hierarchy to support commands: ActionCommand ^ | ActionConfig ^ | HierarchicalActionConfig ActionCommand has: methodName Interceptors Parameters Results resultParameters ActionConfig adds: Class clazz TypeConverter HierarchicalActionConfig adds: Commands ActionConfig is the runtime datastructure, the other 2 are used on the programmatic side. Ok, so go ahead and start making fun of my class naming, but you'd better have some better ideas :-) Jason -- Jason Carreira Technical Architect, Notiva Corp. phone: 585.240.2793 fax: 585.272.8118 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Notiva - optimizing trade relationships (tm) --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
RE: [OS-webwork] ww2: ServletContext and ServletActionContext
> > Since this is more than a little ugly, I've added > > com.os.ww.ServletActionContext with > > getRequest/getResponse/getServletConfig/getServletContext/getP > > arameters. > > How about making ServletActionContext extend ActionContext, only have a > private constructor? That way, you can still get at all of the old stuff > from ActionContext plus the new stuff by just using ServletActionContext > and you don't have to use ActionContext from Webwork. I've made this > change on mine Of course, I can't see if it still passes your unit > tests because there aren't any... :-) +1 > > Also, I'd like to suggest renaming WebWorkStatics to > > WebWorkConstants as I think it's more clear. > > +1 +1 -- Matt Ho Principal Indigo Egg, Inc. http://www.indigoegg.com/ --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
RE: [OS-webwork] ww2: ServletContext and ServletActionContext
> -Original Message- > From: Erik Beeson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:59 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] ww2: ServletContext and ServletActionContext > > > On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, Jason Carreira wrote: > > Not sure what you mean here. You didn't add it to the ActionContext > > class? No, wait... Looks like you added it to the extra > context that > > is passed in to create the ActionContext by the > ServletDispatcher. Ok. > > That seemed like the logical place for it. Yep, I just wasn't sure what you meant. > > > How about making ServletActionContext extend ActionContext, > only have > > a private constructor? That way, you can still get at all > of the old > > stuff from ActionContext plus the new stuff by just using > > ServletActionContext and you don't have to use ActionContext from > > Webwork. > > I did that first, but got into ugly constructor issues. > Making it private fixed it though, good call. committed. Cool. > > > I've made this change on mine Of course, I can't see if > it still > > passes your unit tests because there aren't any... :-) > > My unit testing is limited to copying already existing unit > tests and making them work for my situation. As there seems > to be no ActionContextTest, I was at a loss for a > ServletActionContextTest. I'm happy to write unit tests for > all my code, I just need to figure out how. > > Can you recommend a nice junit cookbook? :) > Hmm.. Not really. I've just done the old "Learn by Doing" and looking at others. There was a good series of articles in Software Development magazine telling a fictional story of a new developer joining an organization and learning test-first development... Not sure if they're online. I'll write up some simple unit tests for ActionContext and ServletActionContext. Jason --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
RE: [OS-webwork] ww2: ServletContext and ServletActionContext
On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, Jason Carreira wrote: > Not sure what you mean here. You didn't add it to the ActionContext > class? No, wait... Looks like you added it to the extra context that is > passed in to create the ActionContext by the ServletDispatcher. Ok. That seemed like the logical place for it. > How about making ServletActionContext extend ActionContext, only have a > private constructor? That way, you can still get at all of the old stuff > from ActionContext plus the new stuff by just using ServletActionContext > and you don't have to use ActionContext from Webwork. I did that first, but got into ugly constructor issues. Making it private fixed it though, good call. committed. > I've made this change on mine Of course, I can't see if it still > passes your unit tests because there aren't any... :-) My unit testing is limited to copying already existing unit tests and making them work for my situation. As there seems to be no ActionContextTest, I was at a loss for a ServletActionContextTest. I'm happy to write unit tests for all my code, I just need to figure out how. Can you recommend a nice junit cookbook? :) --Erik --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
RE: [OS-webwork] ww2: ServletContext and ServletActionContext
> -Original Message- > From: Erik Beeson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > It seems there is currently no way of getting at the > ServletContext, only the > HttpServletRequest/HttpServletResponse (from anywhere, an > Action, an Interceptor, a Component, etc) unless I'm missing > something. If there is a way, I'd love to hear it. > > To fix this, I've added ServletConfig to the ActionContext, > since it exposes everything else one might want. Not sure what you mean here. You didn't add it to the ActionContext class? No, wait... Looks like you added it to the extra context that is passed in to create the ActionContext by the ServletDispatcher. Ok. > > Also, there is currently no ServletActionContext, so getting > the request object looks like: HttpServletRequest request = > (HttpServletRequest)ActionContext.get(WebWorkStatics.HTTP_REQUEST); > > Since this is more than a little ugly, I've added > com.os.ww.ServletActionContext with > getRequest/getResponse/getServletConfig/getServletContext/getP > arameters. How about making ServletActionContext extend ActionContext, only have a private constructor? That way, you can still get at all of the old stuff from ActionContext plus the new stuff by just using ServletActionContext and you don't have to use ActionContext from Webwork. I've made this change on mine Of course, I can't see if it still passes your unit tests because there aren't any... :-) > The last two aren't as important as the first three as > SAC.getServletContext() just does > getServletConfig().getServletContext() > and SAContext.getParameters() just does > ActionContext.getParameters(), but I added it to be orthogonal. > > Also, I'd like to suggest renaming WebWorkStatics to > WebWorkConstants as I think it's more clear. +1 > > Thoughts on all this? All but the WebWorkStatics rename is in > sandbox/webwork now. > > --Erik > Jason --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
Re: [OS-webwork] Re: Webwork 2.0 example app
If you all can create a more stable version of Roller which uses WebWork I would be happy to drop that "Dave" guy like a bad habit. :-D Of course I am kidding - sort of. I am interested in knowing the following: 1.) Will you get Dave on board and just make an updated version of Roller with WebWork replacing Struts, or will it be a "competitor" to Roller? 2.) Will you maintain it as a production-quality application which I could use on FreeRoller (I might have to create a new site called FreeWoller)? 3.) Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Sincerely, Anthony Eden Dave Johnson wrote: Hi all, Jason Carreira wrote: Hi Dave, Can you point us to some entry points where we would start plugging Webwork on top of the core Roller code? I'm still not sure, like Patrick said, if it would make more sense to start from scratch or build on top of the Roller backend. Sounds like you guys want to roll your own example app from scratch and a weblogger is a great example app. I look forward to seeing it develop and to stealing whatever code I can. Are you guys going to dump the faux-EJB backend you have now? We will not be generating the persistent objects anymore, if that is what you mean. I'm working on that right now. We will still be using XDoclet though. I know you're working on putting in Hibernate, but I had the impression it was going to be a runtime choice, rather than a replacement. I don't have the time to maintain two backends, so if Hibernate works out then our Castor implementation will probably go away. Unless somebody volunteers to maintain it (fat chance of that). Thanks again for the awesome tool in Roller... Maybe we can convert you guys over to Webwork? :-) You are welcome. I don't plan on rewriting the Roller UI. I'll just switch over whole-hog to your new weblogging software once it is up to snuff, maintaining my own is a persistent pain in the backend ;-) Cheers, Dave --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
RE: [OS-webwork] Re: Webwork 2.0 example app
> -Original Message- > From: Anthony Eden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:32 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Re: Webwork 2.0 example app > > > If you all can create a more stable version of Roller which > uses WebWork > I would be happy to drop that "Dave" guy like a bad habit. :-D > > Of course I am kidding - sort of. I am interested in knowing > the following: > > 1.) Will you get Dave on board and just make an updated version of > Roller with WebWork replacing Struts, or will it be a "competitor" to > Roller? I think the consensus is that we'd like to have a go at building from scratch. We'd love to have Dave, Lance, Matt, et. al join on (and we'd love to have more Webwork converts and blogs talking about Webwork Struts gets enough press already!) > 2.) Will you maintain it as a production-quality application which I > could use on FreeRoller (I might have to create a new site called > FreeWoller)? That's the plan. > 3.) Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? > The chicken... No, wait... The egg... I give up. Huh? > Sincerely, > Anthony Eden > Jason --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
[OS-webwork] ww2: ServletContext and ServletActionContext
It seems there is currently no way of getting at the ServletContext, only the HttpServletRequest/HttpServletResponse (from anywhere, an Action, an Interceptor, a Component, etc) unless I'm missing something. If there is a way, I'd love to hear it. To fix this, I've added ServletConfig to the ActionContext, since it exposes everything else one might want. Also, there is currently no ServletActionContext, so getting the request object looks like: HttpServletRequest request = (HttpServletRequest)ActionContext.get(WebWorkStatics.HTTP_REQUEST); Since this is more than a little ugly, I've added com.os.ww.ServletActionContext with getRequest/getResponse/getServletConfig/getServletContext/getParameters. The last two aren't as important as the first three as SAC.getServletContext() just does getServletConfig().getServletContext() and SAContext.getParameters() just does ActionContext.getParameters(), but I added it to be orthogonal. Also, I'd like to suggest renaming WebWorkStatics to WebWorkConstants as I think it's more clear. Thoughts on all this? All but the WebWorkStatics rename is in sandbox/webwork now. --Erik --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
[OS-webwork] Redirect Action implements CommandDriven, why?
Is there any reason why Redirect implements CommandDriven? I'm going to remove this, unless there's a reason not to. Jason -- Jason Carreira Technical Architect, Notiva Corp. phone: 585.240.2793 fax: 585.272.8118 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Notiva - optimizing trade relationships (tm) --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
RE: [OS-webwork] Programmatic configuration
> -Original Message- > From: Rickard Öberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Ah, ok, I looked at the interface you sent in email, and true, it > doesn't describe it well. But, I would argue that the > interface should > be split, as I described in my first email on programmatic > configuration. > > You'd typically have 3 players involved: > 1 Some configuration repository which the application can use to get > configuration settings. This is the RuntimeConfiguration Interface. Both this and ProgrammableConfiguration are implemented by ConfigurationManager right now. This uses a very flat data structure. You call getActionConfig(String namespace, String name) to get an ActionConfig. The Package structures, etc. are stripped away as they're only used to provide defaults and inheritance. > 2 Some configuration bundle containing settings that have > been loaded. > This mostly just have get/set methods. This is ProgrammableConfiguration. It also has a reload() method to tell it to get the new configuration from 3, below, and buildRuntimeConfiguration(), which can be thought of as a "save" method which tells it to generate the runtime configuration from the hierarchical configuration structures which can be programmatically tweaked. > 3 Various loaders which read configuration files (e.g. XML) > and create > configuration bundles and register these with the repository. This is ConfigurationFactory, which can have one object implementing Configuration registered with it (by default this is DefaultConfiguration). When ConfigurationManager.reload() is called, it calls ConfigurationFactory.getConfiguration().init(this) to tell the Configuration to load its configuration and register the configuration params with the ProgrammableConfiguration it's passed (ConfigurationManager). DefaultConfiguration starts at init() and loads the xwork.xml file, parsing through it building up data structures and registering them with the ProgrammableConfiguration it is passed. I'm thinking the Configuration Interface should be renamed to ConfigurationProvider and ConfigurationFactory could be ConfigurationProviderFactory. > > It then becomes possible to configure the app at runtime > without using 3 > at all, since 2 can be created programmatically. Instances of > 2 can also > be serialized and sent around in a system without much trouble. > Hadn't thought of sending serialized configuration objects around. Why would you want to do this? Right now what happens is that ConfigurationManager has a static instance which is initialized at class initialization and calls reload to get the Configuration from the ConfigurationFactory. > It seems the current interface does 2 and 3. Split it up into > ConfigurationLoader and ConfigurationBundle and it should work better. > > This is basically what's there. Jason --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
Re: [OS-webwork] OT: Wiki [Was: Webwork 2.0 example app]
Silo is a component in PortalWizard, used to store binary data. It's sort of the (actually living) descendant of OSDocman, which was killed when someone said they'd code it and didn't bother to actually do any of it. It's open source (a free component of PortalWizard), uses DAO, defaults to storing versions on the filesystem, and is generally pretty flexible. However, we're in the final stages of tweakage with portalwizard, and we're not enjoying documentation any more than anyone else is. :) We're getting there. On Tue, 25 Feb 2003, Francisco Hernandez wrote: > what is the Silo engine? > > > I have a wiki based on webwork, my own parsing engine and Epeshs Silo > > engine, it could use some OSCache to speed things up but other than that > > it's fully functional. If Epesh releases Silo, I could give this out > pretty > > much right now. - Joseph B. Ottinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://enigmastation.comIT Consultant --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
Re: [OS-webwork] Programmatic configuration
Jason Carreira wrote: Well, it's supposed to provide an interface to allow the configuration to be modified and then deployed to runtime. I'm not sure how well ConfigurationBundle describes that. Ah, ok, I looked at the interface you sent in email, and true, it doesn't describe it well. But, I would argue that the interface should be split, as I described in my first email on programmatic configuration. You'd typically have 3 players involved: 1 Some configuration repository which the application can use to get configuration settings. 2 Some configuration bundle containing settings that have been loaded. This mostly just have get/set methods. 3 Various loaders which read configuration files (e.g. XML) and create configuration bundles and register these with the repository. It then becomes possible to configure the app at runtime without using 3 at all, since 2 can be created programmatically. Instances of 2 can also be serialized and sent around in a system without much trouble. It seems the current interface does 2 and 3. Split it up into ConfigurationLoader and ConfigurationBundle and it should work better. /Rickard --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
RE: [OS-webwork] Programmatic configuration
How about ConfigurableAndDeployableThingy? That way, nobody will EVER fool with it, so it's pretty safe to deploy. On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, Jason Carreira wrote: > Well, it's supposed to provide an interface to allow the configuration > to be modified and then deployed to runtime. I'm not sure how well > ConfigurationBundle describes that. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Rickard Öberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:30 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Programmatic configuration > > > > > > Jason Carreira wrote: > > > How about ManagableConfiguration? > > > > or ConfigurationPackage > > > > or ConfigurationUnit > > > > or ConfigurationBundle > > > > Either works, but maybe ConfigurationBundle best describes what it > > actually is. > > > > > > > > --- > > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! > > Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive > > scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, > > Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp > > ___ > > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork > > > > > --- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! > Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. > Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. > www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp > ___ > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork > - Joseph B. Ottinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://enigmastation.comIT Consultant --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
RE: [OS-webwork] Programmatic configuration
Well, it's supposed to provide an interface to allow the configuration to be modified and then deployed to runtime. I'm not sure how well ConfigurationBundle describes that. > -Original Message- > From: Rickard Öberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:30 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Programmatic configuration > > > Jason Carreira wrote: > > How about ManagableConfiguration? > > or ConfigurationPackage > > or ConfigurationUnit > > or ConfigurationBundle > > Either works, but maybe ConfigurationBundle best describes what it > actually is. > > > > --- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! > Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive > scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, > Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp > ___ > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork > --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
Re: [OS-webwork] Programmatic configuration
Jason Carreira wrote: How about ManagableConfiguration? or ConfigurationPackage or ConfigurationUnit or ConfigurationBundle Either works, but maybe ConfigurationBundle best describes what it actually is. --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
RE: [OS-webwork] ETA of WW 2.0
Unless you're intimately familiar with the inner workings of Xwork (i.e. you're Patrick or myself :-)), then I would suggest going with 1.3 for now. If you don't need to start coding for a month or two, then it's probably worth using WW2, though. We've just started coding some new features using WW here, and we're using WW 1.3 because it's more stable, tested, and documented. > -Original Message- > From: Scott Farquhar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 8:27 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] ETA of WW 2.0 > > > Mate - I'd go for 1.3 at the moment. Or even CVS HEAD. I'm > don't have > any real say in when 2.0 is released, but I would say that 1.3 is a > safer bet. It is already tested in a lot of different servlet > containers - JIRA runs on Tomcat, Resin, Jetty, Orion, Weblogic. > > Cheers, > Scott > > Anders Engström wrote: > > I've been surfing the Wiki looking for information, but didn't find > > anything. So - is there an ETA for WebWork 2.0? > > > > We would like to use WW 2.0 in our product - but depending on the > > release date we might have to use 1.3 instead. > > > > //Anders > > > > -- > > ATLASSIAN - http://www.atlassian.com > Expert J2EE Software, Services and Support > --- > Need a simple, powerful way to track and manage issues? > Try JIRA - http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira > > > > --- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! > Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive > scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, > Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp > ___ > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork > --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
RE: [OS-webwork] Programmatic configuration
How about ManagableConfiguration?
> -Original Message-
> From: Jason Carreira
> Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 11:50 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] Programmatic configuration
>
>
> Rename away I don't think any of those describe as
> correctly as (the name I named it, I dare not utter its name)
> the purpose of the Interface, but whatever we want to call it is ok.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Hani Suleiman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 11:47 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Programmatic configuration
> >
> >
> > Eww, what a horrible name, ProgrammableConfiguration! How about
> > ModifiableConfiguration? DynamicConfiguration?
> SettableConfiguration?
> >
> > On Wednesday, February 26, 2003, at 08:27 AM, Jason Carreira wrote:
> >
> > > I checked in the first pass at programmatic configuration.
> > The way it
> > > works is that any class, like DefaultConfiguration, which
> > implements
> > > Configuration can be registered with the ConfigurationFactory. The
> > > only method in the Configuration Interface is (now):
> > >
> > > public void init(ProgrammableConfiguration configurationManager)
> > > throws ConfigurationException;
> > >
> > > ProgrammableConfiguration is an Interface with this signature:
> > >
> > > public interface ProgrammableConfiguration {
> > > void addPackageContext(String name, PackageContext
> > > packageContext);
> > >
> > > void removePackageContext(String name);
> > >
> > > Set getPackageContextNames();
> > >
> > > PackageContext getPackageContext(String name);
> > >
> > > Map getPackageContexts();
> > >
> > > void reload() throws ConfigurationException;
> > >
> > > void buildRuntimeConfiguration();
> > >
> > > Interceptor getInterceptor(String clazz) throws
> > > ConfigurationException;
> > >
> > > void destroy();
> > > }
> > >
> > > The configuration implementation (and there are 2 now, the
> > > DefaultConfiguration and SimpleConfiguration which has some
> > hard-coded
> > > configuration for tests) uses the addPackageContext()
> method to add
> > > configurations as it builds them by whatever means during
> > its init()
> > > method. This is called during the reload() method of
> > > ConfigurationManager (which implements ProgrammableConfiguration)
> > > which also calls buildRuntimeConfiguration() afterwards.
> > The idea here
> > > is that the ProgrammableConfiguration keeps the programmatic
> > > configuration and runtime configuration separate, then builds the
> > > runtime from the programmatic when instructed to do so.
> > This lets you
> > > edit the programmatic configuration without interfering with the
> > > runtime configuration until you're done, then tell it to
> > > buildRuntimeConfiguration().
> > >
> > > More on this later. Take a look if you're interested. Comments and
> > > suggestions welcomed.
> > >
> > > Jason
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jason Carreira
> > > Technical Architect, Notiva Corp.
> > > phone:585.240.2793
> > > fax:585.272.8118
> > > email:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > ---
> > > Notiva - optimizing trade relationships (tm)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't
> > > afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive
> > scholarships. Get
> > > hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more.
> > > www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp
> > > ___
> > > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies!
> > Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive
> > scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun,
> > Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp
> > ___
> > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
> >
>
>
> ---
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies!
> Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships.
> Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more.
> www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp
> ___
> Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
>
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies!
Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships.
Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Lin
Re: [OS-webwork] ETA of WW 2.0
Mate - I'd go for 1.3 at the moment. Or even CVS HEAD. I'm don't have any real say in when 2.0 is released, but I would say that 1.3 is a safer bet. It is already tested in a lot of different servlet containers - JIRA runs on Tomcat, Resin, Jetty, Orion, Weblogic. Cheers, Scott Anders Engström wrote: I've been surfing the Wiki looking for information, but didn't find anything. So - is there an ETA for WebWork 2.0? We would like to use WW 2.0 in our product - but depending on the release date we might have to use 1.3 instead. //Anders -- ATLASSIAN - http://www.atlassian.com Expert J2EE Software, Services and Support --- Need a simple, powerful way to track and manage issues? Try JIRA - http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
Re: [OS-webwork] OT: Wiki [Was: Webwork 2.0 example app]
> SnipSnap has a blog, so you're duplicating effort in any case. Maybe you > guys should just add the stuff you want to snipsnap instead... Now we've gone full circle and have gotten totally lost. I think the point was to make a demo/tutorial app for webwork 2.0/xwork/opensymphony, not build a better mousetrap... --Erik --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
Re: [OS-webwork] OT: Wiki [Was: Webwork 2.0 example app]
> > about, "gee, should this be a link". It essentially let's the author focus > > on content and not navigation. > > But the content ends up being UnnaturalWikiLingo that I personally find > AnnoyingToRead. Just like the content tends to be? > > Just my off-topic opinion on the matter. I'm going to write a filter for > > My even farther off-topic opinion. Could some combination of the two be > made to work? I think [linking] was my favorite feature in snipsnap. I > have a lot of other issues with it though ;) SnipSnap has a blog, so you're duplicating effort in any case. Maybe you guys should just add the stuff you want to snipsnap instead... - Joseph B. Ottinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://enigmastation.comIT Consultant --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
[OS-webwork] ETA of WW 2.0
I've been surfing the Wiki looking for information, but didn't find anything. So - is there an ETA for WebWork 2.0? We would like to use WW 2.0 in our product - but depending on the release date we might have to use 1.3 instead. //Anders -- |===| |Anders Engström| |[EMAIL PROTECTED]| |http://www.gnejs.net | |===| |Your mind is like an umbrella. | |It doesn't work unless you open it.| | /Frank Zappa | |===| pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [OS-webwork] OT: Wiki [Was: Webwork 2.0 example app]
> I agree WikiNaming is more restrictive, but I've found that it is that > restriction that keeps naming conventions very standard. PatLightbody would > always be the WikiLink for my page, but without WikiLinking it could be [Pat > Lightbody], [PatLightbody], or [Lightbody, Pat] or any other combo. > WikiNaming/Linking tends to force people in to a standard way to layout > links and generally produces content that "magically" beings to link itself I do like that data gets linked to automatically... > to other content, unbeknownst to the user. Ie: every word WebWork would be > automatically linked to the WebWork page -- the author doesn't need to worry But what about "webwork" and "Webwork"? Seems about as clear as [plightbo]... > about, "gee, should this be a link". It essentially let's the author focus > on content and not navigation. But the content ends up being UnnaturalWikiLingo that I personally find AnnoyingToRead. > Just my off-topic opinion on the matter. I'm going to write a filter for My even farther off-topic opinion. Could some combination of the two be made to work? I think [linking] was my favorite feature in snipsnap. I have a lot of other issues with it though ;) --Erik --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
Re: [OS-webwork] OT: Wiki [Was: Webwork 2.0 example app]
> > 4) WikiNaming support (I hate doing [Foo Bar], I like FooBar) > > But certainly not with this one. The Wiki I'm running now (using > SnipSnap) is used by non-techie people, and for them it's certainly > easier to use the [Name goes here] style. Also, I don't see how names > with non-letters would work (e.g. [Oberg, Rickard]) using the WikiNaming > style. I agree WikiNaming is more restrictive, but I've found that it is that restriction that keeps naming conventions very standard. PatLightbody would always be the WikiLink for my page, but without WikiLinking it could be [Pat Lightbody], [PatLightbody], or [Lightbody, Pat] or any other combo. WikiNaming/Linking tends to force people in to a standard way to layout links and generally produces content that "magically" beings to link itself to other content, unbeknownst to the user. Ie: every word WebWork would be automatically linked to the WebWork page -- the author doesn't need to worry about, "gee, should this be a link". It essentially let's the author focus on content and not navigation. Just my off-topic opinion on the matter. I'm going to write a filter for SnipSnap soon so that this is supported :) -Pat --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp ___ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
