On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Ted Husted wrote:
> Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 16:50:34 -0400 > From: Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Building struts-legacy (was: Re: Nightly build is generating > empty binary distribution file) > > Craig R. McClanahan wrote: > > It wouldn't bother me to break the overall build for a while in order to > > get this sorted out -- IMHO it's pretty broken already :-). But we might > > also want to do a 1.2.0 first. Comments? > > I'd agree that we should do a 1.2.0 first to get the first round of > patches and removed deprecations out-there. > > As Martin and David pointed out, with the idea of a default DataSource > stricken from the 1.2.0 release, Struts-Legacy does not need to be part > of the core Struts build. (Another good reason to do 1.2.0 and the fuss > with the build.) It should be handled like the Commons packages. > > As part of the 1.2.0 release, we can also give notice that the taglibs > will be moved from the core Struts JAR in a subsequent release, and then > start monkeying with the build file for the next milestone. > > If it's practicable, I'd also suggest we consider putting Tiles and the > Validator into an struts-optional JAR. So there would be > struts-core.jar, struts-taglib.jar, and struts-optional.jar on the next > milestone after 1.2.0. (Or just the two if optional is problematic now.) Splitting Tiles and Validator is a little tougher if we go for the previously popular idea of melding all the custom request processor subclasses into a single one (since we don't have multiple inheritance and don't have a decomposition solution yet - which is at least partly my fault). > > -Ted. > > Craig --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
