From: "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Do we expect to have PDF versions of the documentation?
It's listed on the Website conversion,
* http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsWebsiteConversion
and I wondered if anyone was working on it, or had reason to be optimistic
:)
Yes. I filed a bug again
On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 16:49 -0400, Ted Husted wrote:
> On 9/6/05, Christian Meder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > How is "Struts Classic" related to this whole discussion ?
> >
> > IMHO Struts Classic describes the core component best. At least that's
> > the part with which I started doing Java we
Do we expect to have PDF versions of the documentation?
It's listed on the Website conversion,
* http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsWebsiteConversion
and I wondered if anyone was working on it, or had reason to be optimistic :)
-Ted.
-
On 9/6/05, Christian Meder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How is "Struts Classic" related to this whole discussion ?
>
> IMHO Struts Classic describes the core component best. At least that's
> the part with which I started doing Java web application development 4
> years ago so it's definitely the
From: "Wendy Smoak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Where do we stand on moving the rest of the nightly builds to Maven?
Standalone Tiles has a good Maven build,
I looked again, and Maven is only building tiles-core.jar for Tiles, not the
documentation/example webapp. So it's in the same situation as
On Mon, 2005-09-05 at 17:10 -0400, Ted Husted wrote:
> Here's an odd idea: What if we called Struts "Core", Struts "Config" instead?
>
> After all, the purpose of the codebase is to realize the struts-config
> XML file. What goes into Struts "Core" might be ambiguous, but what
> goes inot Struts C
On 9/5/05, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What needs to be done with Taglibs? You added it to the Wiki, but there's
> nothing under site/xdocs for it. I'm fairly sure that the files under
> taglib/doc can be deleted-- I used them to create the JSP 1.2 TLDs that now
> live in taglib/src/
On 9/5/05, Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ted:
>
> I hear what you're saying, but I think that "struts-core" is the most
> accurate label for the things included in that artifact.
> Conceptually, it is "Struts 1.x core", but that's too verbose.
>
> I'm for sticking with "core".
I'
From: "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I really must commend Wendy and James for the excellent work on the
new Struts build. It's working well, and I'm having fun with it. :)
Thanks for taking on the rewrites and the final reorganization... it's been
fun seeing it all come together this weeke
From: "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Where do we stand on moving the rest of the nightly builds to Maven?
Can we assume that Shale, Struts Faces, and Standalone Tiles
(currently in the Sandbox) will all be built by Maven, and remove the
dichotomy on the Acquiring page?
Standalone Tiles has
Ted:
I hear what you're saying, but I think that "struts-core" is the most
accurate label for the things included in that artifact.
Conceptually, it is "Struts 1.x core", but that's too verbose.
I'm for sticking with "core".
Joe
The moniker "Core" did make a lot of sense when we were thin
From: "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
And, we do have to call it something. We're having
great success with Maven, and Maven expects artifacts to have names.
The closest we could come to a no-name artifact would be
struts-struts-1.3.0 -- which is too odd, even for me :)
Maven doesn't care wha
Ted Husted wrote:
The moniker "Core" did make a lot of sense when we were thinking that
the other Struts subprojects would depend on Core. But, we dismissed
that idea when we decided to host Shale. Now, should we decide to host
Struts Ti one day, we would have two Java subprojects not dependant o
On 9/5/05, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree, config is a little too left-field (even though it does make
> sense as Ted describes).
>
> I'm not actually too thrilled with even saying "core" frankly... I would
> be more in favor of simply calling core "Struts" and all the
> su
Where do we stand on moving the rest of the nightly builds to Maven?
Can we assume that Shale, Struts Faces, and Standalone Tiles
(currently in the Sandbox) will all be built by Maven, and remove the
dichotomy on the Acquiring page?
-T.
--
I agree, config is a little too left-field (even though it does make
sense as Ted describes).
I'm not actually too thrilled with even saying "core" frankly... I would
be more in favor of simply calling core "Struts" and all the
sub-projects "Struts-xxx". I understand the reasoning of adding c
You are right, that seems odd.
I really like 'core' since it seems (to me anyway) to encapsulate the
'core' of the framework, but I'm not married to it, and I know how
(sometimes) being too close to something makes it harder to see the
'forrest' ;)
Your thoughts?
--
James Mitchell
Softw
Here's an odd idea: What if we called Struts "Core", Struts "Config" instead?
After all, the purpose of the codebase is to realize the struts-config
XML file. What goes into Struts "Core" might be ambiguous, but what
goes inot Struts Config is defined, by, well, the struts-config XML
declaration.
Hey that look great!
(I only wish I had more time to help)
Keep up the good work!
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
Consulting / Mentoring / Freelance
EdgeTech, Inc.
http://www.edgetechservices.net/
678.910.8017
AIM: jmitchtx
Yahoo: jmitchtx
MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In between coping with a crashed server on my local network, I've
started to make the "final" round of changes on the new website.
I'll be committing these as I go along, but I thought it appropriate
to post the reworked text for the Site and Core homepages directly to
the list. We had talked abou
20 matches
Mail list logo
