Hi. My "vote" would also be to preserve XML configuration support for Struts
in the future.
Keeping XML configuration as an option, even if a future annotations-based
configuration mechanism is introduced, would keep things flexible (and probably
make upgrades from older versions less painful)
On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 3:19 AM Lukasz Lenart
wrote:
> XML is far better than clumsy annotations in your code tbh.
Seconded. Personally I don't care for annotation-based configuration.
They're great
for language-intrinsic stuff, but I've never liked them for config-related
artifacts.
I second NOT dropping XML configuration support.
Best
Markus
Am 08.07.20 um 09:19 schrieb Lukasz Lenart:
> wt., 7 lip 2020 o 16:37 Yasser Zamani napisał(a):
>> Yes it's awesome and I've also been thought for long time to add boot
>> and auto-config (because I've seen people have concerns about S
wt., 7 lip 2020 o 16:37 Yasser Zamani napisał(a):
>
> Yes it's awesome and I've also been thought for long time to add boot
> and auto-config (because I've seen people have concerns about Struts
> flexibility) but can't find enough time :( wdyt? Looks a huge workload
> for me. Basically we should
The final code to run an embedded Jetty:
pom.xml
org.eclipse.jetty
jetty-server
${jetty.version}
org.eclipse.jetty
jetty-servlet
${jetty.version}
org.eclipse.jetty
jetty-webapp
${jetty.version}
org.eclipse.jetty
jetty-jsp
${jetty.version}
J
Yes it's awesome and I've also been thought for long time to add boot
and auto-config (because I've seen people have concerns about Struts
flexibility) but can't find enough time :( wdyt? Looks a huge workload
for me. Basically we should get rid off XMLs to annotations, add
auto-configs, make plugi
Hi,
What do you think about implementing such a simple boot project? I was
able create an embedded Jetty server with these lines:
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
int port = 8080;
if (args.length == 2 && "--port".equals(args[0])) {
port = Integer.parseInt(
