+1 for modules. If the documentation refers to sub-apps anyplace today, that would be a bug =:0)
I did try using both, and sub-apps becomes clumsy. It is probably true that 1.1 is only supporting one possible implementation of modules, but that's something we can sort out later. (Sub modules versus nested modules, or whatever.) -Ted.y 10/16/2002 9:03:19 PM, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I think it's about time we all got on the same page as regards whether these >thingies are called modules or sub-apps. I believe we decided on modules a >while ago, but many of us are still referring to sub-apps. The User Guide at >this point has a mixture of both. > >It's going to be confusing to people if we aren't consistent ourselves, so I >think we need to make the decision here, and then all evangelise the >selected terminology on both lists. > >So, are they modules, or are they sub-apps? > >My personal preference is modules, but I'm capable of typing either when >necessary. :-) > >-- >Martin Cooper > > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
