ary 13, 2003 2:30 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A plea - WAS Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection
Mike Cannon-Brookes wrote:
> Some points that people seem to be forgetting:
> - Xwork is in the SANDBOX and is eXperimental (if you like the X for that)
> - Nothing in Xwork can't be chan
Jason Carreira wrote:
I'm not as familiar with the non-common usages of ThreadLocals as you
are. I understand how they can be gotten and set, but how do you get
them from another thread to set into this thread, when a new thread
is kicked off (or a new thread, like the event handler in Swing, is
s
On Tue, 2003-01-14 at 21:17, Robert Nicholson wrote:
> Why does it have to be a MDB? Can't you just make a listener? What will
> an MDB buy you?
>
In a word: transactions (oh also instance caching for tuning but that
would be more than 1 word :) )
We use a lot of MDBs in our app for these reaso
Robert Nicholson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 5:18 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: A plea - WAS Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection
>
>
> Why does it have to be a MDB? Can't you just make a listener?
> What will
> an MDB buy you?
&
n jobs asynchronously...
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Peter Kelley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 5:28 PM
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Subject: Re: A plea - WAS Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection
> >&
AS Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection
After reading this for a while I cannot recall who asked for
swing clients in the first place. I don't think they were
ever a requirement.
In terms of non web stuff I would like to see something that
could talk to JMS in an asynchronous manner but I'm not go
Message-
> From: Peter Kelley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 5:28 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: A plea - WAS Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection
>
>
> After reading this for a while I cannot recall who asked for
> swing clients in the firs
After reading this for a while I cannot recall who asked for swing
clients in the first place. I don't think they were ever a requirement.
In terms of non web stuff I would like to see something that could talk
to JMS in an asynchronous manner but I'm not going to lose sleep if it's
outside the s
> -Original Message-
> From: Rickard Öberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Why is it difficult? Whenever there's a thread disconnect you
> just get
> the state, and then re-set it when you want to restart the execution.
> What exactly is the difficulty?
I'm not as familiar with the non
Can you explain? I'd like to know.
> -Original Message-
> From: Heng Sin Low [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 8:48 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] Reflection
>
>
> The multiple thread thing is simple/trivi
On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 08:30:17AM +0100, Rickard Öberg wrote:
> Mike Cannon-Brookes wrote:
> >Some points that people seem to be forgetting:
> >- Xwork is in the SANDBOX and is eXperimental (if you like the X for that)
> >- Nothing in Xwork can't be changed, these are ideas, prototypes
> >- Xwork
boxed wrote:
The problem is not "right" or "wrong", the problem is the pro's and
con's of the various approaches, and AFAICT the explicit approach has
some limitations, whereas the non-explicit approach has no limitations.
I can think of an example right now when the explicit solution is much mo
On this I agree mate ;)
Xwork will still be primarily a web framework, I think everyone is saying
that. But as far as possible we should allow non web uses if we can.
(Like the abstraction of session out - it's neater that way AND enables non
web uses)
Cheers,
Mike
PS For the record I've never
> The problem is not "right" or "wrong", the problem is the pro's and
> con's of the various approaches, and AFAICT the explicit approach has
> some limitations, whereas the non-explicit approach has no limitations.
I can think of an example right now when the explicit solution is much more
flexib
Mike Cannon-Brookes wrote:
Some points that people seem to be forgetting:
- Xwork is in the SANDBOX and is eXperimental (if you like the X for that)
- Nothing in Xwork can't be changed, these are ideas, prototypes
- Xwork will be better for 'web work' than WebWork is!
- Xwork will be better for 'n
Jason Carreira wrote:
Actions were originally spec'd to have a method, execute(), with no
parameters. That was back when we had ServletAware, etc., and the
context information would be made available to the Action before it
was executed. When it was decided to get rid of these interfaces, to
decou
s I think it would be
> > unfortunate, however, considering the alternative (miss out
> > on all the great new functionality) I still think it would be
> > worth it, but that's just my thinking for all it's worth.
> >
> > /Robert
> >
> > -Original
+1 for asynchronous messages
On Mon, 2003-01-13 at 00:24, Rickard Öberg wrote:
> Erik Beeson wrote:
> > Rickard, as I understood, XWork was to break away from J2EE, hence
> > removing "web" from the name. If new versions with strong web ties are
> > going to remain, shouldn't they remain under the
PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 10:18 AM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection
>>
>>
>> I think there are two directions here and I don't see any
>> easy resolution at this stage. So, yes I think two projec
rojects make sense. My next question is "Is
> there room for these two projects at OS?" Does it make sense or will it be a
> distraction since they do have overlap? Should WW move back out on its own?
>
> -Matt
>
> ----- Original Message -
> From: "Rickard Öb
On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 08:24 AM, Rickard Öberg wrote:
So, given all of this, my resignation from XWork still holds. The
requirements that have been voiced the last few days are not mine, and
I don't think they're compatible with my goals, at least not without
serious compromises tha
- Original Message -
From: "Jason Carreira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 11:04 AM
Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] Reflection
> I'm not sure I see the disconnect here. What's so different about Xwork?
Views can still be JSP
arlens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 1:11 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection
>
>
> I have been following this list for quite some time with
> great interest. I really like all the new ideas for XWork. I
> think
people are talking about forking the
code base and splitting Xwork and Webwork, then I think we should roll it back and
discuss.
> -Original Message-
> From: matt baldree [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 10:18 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re:
ickard Öberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 14:24:26 +0100
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection
Erik Beeson wrote:
> Rickard, as I understood, XWork was to break away from J2EE, hence
> removing "web" from the name. If new versions with strong
ove back out on its own?
-Matt
- Original Message -
From: "Rickard Öberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 7:24 AM
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection
Erik Beeson wrote:
> Rickard, as I understood, XWork was to break awa
I think it might be beneficial to do both xwork and webwork as separate project
at this point of time. At least, people will spent less time debating at
mailing list and get things done. I guess there is no right or wrong here, it
is just that people have different preference and needs. For instanc
What kind of real world example applications do you want? Wafer has a
working webwork example...
And docs? Who needs them - they're for people who aren't willing to roll
their sleeves up and dig directly into the code, right? (Note droll
humour.)
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003, Heng Sin Low wrote:
> I thin
Erik Beeson wrote:
Rickard, as I understood, XWork was to break away from J2EE, hence
removing "web" from the name. If new versions with strong web ties are
going to remain, shouldn't they remain under the original WebWork name?
That is something I wanted to gauge by my last couple of emails. I
29 matches
Mail list logo
