--- "Craig R. McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 3 Jul 2003, Vic Cekvenich wrote: > > > Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 16:32:02 -0400 > > From: Vic Cekvenich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Modular Struts Examples > > > > > > > > Craig R. McClanahan wrote: > > > > > > > >>> > > >>>David > > > > >>>> > > >> > > >>Would David's argument be that JSF integration (requires 2.3) be > > >>postponed till Struts 2.0? > > > > > > > > > For integration into the core of Struts, yes it does. But we can > provide > > > an optional add-on integration for Faces, just like struts-el does > for EL > > > evaluation, as soon as Faces 1.0 goes final. Use it if you want, > but it's > > > not required by the core of Struts. > > > > > > > > >>OK, just do one or the other, so everyone is playing on the level > field. > > > > > > > So all I am saying, call v 1.2 2.0 if you want, but target 2.3. > > > > Target what? The core of Struts? As you'll see from my other message, > I'd rather see us skip 2.3 for Struts 2.0; the incremental benefits of > Servlet 2.4 and JSP 2.0 are well worth it.
I agree with skipping 2.3. I don't much care about the Servlet 2.4 stuff but JSP 2.0 is a big deal. David > > > > > .V > > Craig > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
