On Jun 24, 2005, at 1:20 AM, Nguyen Trong Hung wrote:
Juan Carlos Murillo wrote:
You may think it will be small and simple, but I've always found that
these things grow to be larger than you expect. Anything more than a
one or two page HTML base web stie will benefit from using some kind
of
web framework - and it is much easier to start using one from the
beginning that to try and migrate later.
Steve
I think you might be right about this, but I really do hate the
religious aspect of choosing web frameworks, which most of the time
just
bloat projects, but that's just my preference.
I think we could benefit from using the Java Standard Tag Libraries,
which will clean up our jsps, but am not really sold on bringing in
Tapestry, WebWorks, Struts or SpringMVC/WebFlow.
How about we prototype some more, maybe develop four or five basic
functionalities and reevaluate to see if it is getting messy and we
need
a framework?
I also think that a web framework is great for web admin console.
However, it should be lightweight, simple
easy to use and standard compliant (work great with JSTL). I think we
should take a poll from people
who are interested in contributing to this project as well as
committers of James.
If you would want to go in the other direction and use a bare-bones
approach then directly embedding Apache XML-RPC in James may be a
clever solution. That way James could offer an XML-RPC admin interface
and a built-in bare-bones Web-Admin tool and the total solution would
only add about 90KB to James. Apache XML-RPC contains a built-in Web
Server that is normally only used to serve XML-RPC request - but it
probably could be tweaked to directly serve some simple html pages
also.
Chris
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
