--- Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > David Graham wrote: > > No, I was thinking Actions would be passed an ActionContext in their > > execute() method similar to how Servlets know about a ServletContext. > The > > ActionContext would contain the HttpServletRequest, form bean, etc. > and > > would serve to keep the API stable while allowing flexibility in what > the > > ActionContext actually contained. > > Perhaps it's time for a Commons Context foundation class. Tiles uses a > Context, Velocity uses a Context, the Commons-Chain sandbox package uses > > a Context, Struts wants to use a Context, and I'm sure that there are > others. > > Ideally, we might want to be able to pass a Context between Struts and > the business layer as well as other packages like Tiles and Velocity. So > > it might be helpful if they could be implementations of the same > underlying interface. > > Perhaps we could squeeze it into Resources, since, in practice, messages > > are definitely something you would be attaching to a Context. > > =:0) I just don't want Geir coming along in a few months and pointing > out how many Context implementations we have in Jakarta now =:0)
I'm not sure that Context is a reusable idea. The ActionContext is likely to have very different attributes than a VelocityContext (or whatever they call it). For example, Servlet has ServletConfig and Portlet has PortletConfig but that doesn't mean they could both be crammed into OneBigConfig :-). David > > -Ted. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
