[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-274?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12703599#action_12703599
]
Hugo Palma commented on TAP5-274:
---------------------------------
All the services that relate to the old ApplicationState concept weren't
renamed accordingly.
I've created a new issue for that: TAP5-669
> Application State Object is a misleading term; rename @ApplicationState to
> @SessionState
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TAP5-274
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-274
> Project: Tapestry 5
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Geoff Callender
> Assignee: Howard M. Lewis Ship
> Fix For: 5.1.0.4
>
>
> This is a record of a discussion that went on in the mailing list on 16-18
> Sep 2008. I proposed that the term ApplicationStateObject caused confusion.
> Some agreed but not all. Regardless, the discussion threw up some
> interesting food for thought, so I've captured it here for further
> consideration.
> Here's the e-mail that kicked it off.
> From: geoff.callender.jumpst...@gmail.com
> Subject: T5: ApplicationStateObject is misleading
> Date: 16 September 2008 9:06:12 PM
> To: us...@tapestry.apache.org
> We want Tapestry to be as natural as possible for newcomers, so it's
> important to have terminology that is not misleading. Right now might be the
> last chance to tidy some of these up before T5.0 goes final.
> One term that I believe many people find misleading is ApplicationState. The
> problem is that it implies it will make an object available across the whole
> application, ie. application-scoped; which is not its purpose.
> The doco says that ASOs "are unique to an individual user, not shared between
> users", which is not quite right, either.
> The standard usage is to tie an object's scope to that of a web session, so
> maybe we should put "session" in the name? Eg.
> @SessionScoped
> @SessionShared
> @ShareAcrossSession
> It is important to understand that the term "session" here is NOT a reference
> to the persistence mechanism, but a reference to the scope.
> Alternatively, let's keep it really obvious with this:
> @StateObject
> with the understanding that the default persistence strategy is "session".
> What do others think? Are you happy with ApplicationState?
> Geoff
> The discussion continued on these 2 threads:
> * http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.tapestry.user/65601/focus=65601
> * http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.tapestry.user/65638/focus=65638
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
