Hi again, Cedric :-)
Cedric Dumoulin wrote:
Hi Eddie,
Eddie Bush wrote:
Cedric,
I wasn't trying to step on toes :-) I can't say how much more I'd
prefer you refactor Tiles than me. You (obviously) are a *lot* more
familiar with it's inner workings!
The point to keep in mind though is that 1.1 *is* about seperatism.
If you have a strong separation between modules with Tiles, you go
against the Tiles philosophy (share to reuse, to reduce maintenance,
...). If you do strong separation, you will be consistent with the
module philosophy, but you will be inconsistent with the Tiles one.
So, peoples using Tiles will not use modules because they will loose
one of its main advantage.
So, we need a way to conciliate both philosophy.
My idea was to have one Tiles factory per module, and to have a
syntax allowing cross references between module namespaces (for URL).
Also, a same tiles config file could be used by several factories,
allowing some commons basic definitions. This later requirement bring
some problems: the shared config file namespace is not the same
depending on the loading module. In this case, how to specify URLs in
a way consistent to module philosophy ? Should we mark all as
contextRelative=false ? If yes, what will happen if the module name
change ?
This is such little things that need to be solved in order to propose
a consistent behavior. After that, it will be more easy to implement
something !
You and I are in the same camp on this, but I don't think now is the
time for significant change. We need to "hurry" 1.1, and the only way I
see to do that is for each of us to agree to seperatism in 1.1 -
understanding and *expecting* that 1.2 will be our chance to solve the
problems we wanted to solve in 1.1 but couldn't (because of time).
Would it, in your opinion, require undoing changes made in 1.1 to
enforce seperatism to achieve a better affect in 1.2? I like your
intent, I believe, very much. 1.2 is really the target for making
modules work "together" though - that should be it's primary focus.
The Tiles goal of sharing common pages should be maintained in 1.1.
The module goal is to let separate teams work independently on
different modules. In this context, Tiles should combine both goals.
See Ted's note about specifying "global" definitions. I think that may
suffice. I *know* :-) it's not something you (or I) will find "ideal",
but can we please overlook that for 1.1 and focus on utopia in 1.2?
There's a lot of folks that would love to use 1.1 right now, and can't
simply because it has a beta in it's name. Those people who *are* using
modules would not be affected by us at all from what I can tell - they
simply cannot use tiles at this point :-( not in non-default modules!
(I resorted to using definitions defined in JSP - that *does* work.
It's a compromise I'd like to get away from as quickly as possible
though). So, can we *please* aim for seperatism in 1.1 and then focus
purely on how sharing should be done in 1.2?
If you're working on resolving this I'll just bow out and let you
have it :-) Please let me know. I'm still reviewing the code to
make absolutely sure I know what I'm doing before I go to changing
anything, and I'd hate to be throwing wasted time into the effort -
especially when a much more competent person is at hand.
Your help is welcome. Also, someone else than me with a very well
understanding of the Tiles philosophy and its current implementation
is more than welcome. But, please, don't forget to expose your
intention to other commiters before making heavy changes. The best is
to describe your goals, your expected behavior, and maybe a simple
example of use. Only after that you can propose an implementation.
Thanks for the guidebook :-) I don't think I've heard anything stated
so clearly about how to proceed - that certainly does make a lot of
sense to me though.
Cedric
--
Eddie Bush
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
