If anyone wants to start writing up patterns and submitting them to the project (preferably in XML), I'd be happy to shepard them into the documentation. But someone has to be willling to do the work. This is an open source project, and everyone who uses Struts is part of the team. We don't take your money, but we will take your contributions =:0)
If anyone is in the mood to help with the documentation, but isn't up for cataloging patterns, there are a number of 1.1 sections still marked [:TODO:]. There are also still a number of open questions on the newbie FAQ. http://jakarta.apache.org/struts/newbie.html -Ted. Phase Web and Multimedia wrote: >I have seen so many extensions and ideas being developed around struts. One >of the things that I have noticed is that there are a lot of different >apporaches being taken towards using Struts. In my own conversations with >colleagues I have found that there is a fair amount of confusion mounting >over proper design patterns within and extending struts. > >I don't know if there is a base set of "suggested" patterns that have been >layed out. But, maybe we can collect the wisdom of the contirbutors in order >to avoid development of heavy or misplaced extensions or apps. I know Ted >has laid down some stuff for us to view in his "Catalog". But, there have >been several things I've seen popping up. For example, The debate used to >be... do i extend the Action class or the Action Servlet... Now, we seem to >be extending the crap out of the Request Processor. The danger is that there >many ways to implement an idea and it could work in the extended Action >class or the extended RequestProcessor. But, why should we extend the >ReqeuestProcessor or the Action class. What extensions are best run against >each of the extendable classes within struts. Also, I have seen a >processPreprocess() method that is being used in the RequestProcessor class. >What is the best use for processPreproccess()? > >Finally, from what i am seeing of the struts codebase is that it is starting >to get really bulky. I thought the goal was to remain lightweight and >provide hooks for extensions. I am seeing all the nifty extensions being >developed and put into the base. Isn't there a way we can provide >configurable extending? Rather than work on making the base include every >good extension, why not make the base easier to extend and provide a >standard set of hooks that can be used to access the internals. I think >maybe I'm all washed up on this. I have been using struts for a year now and >I am constantly wondering what the heck is going on. Everyone seems to be >doing things different and it's getting difficult to build a project that is >going to have some longevity. > >In summary, I am seeing people develop extensions that conflict and do not >play nice with other extensions. I see Action classes being extended and I >see RequestProccessor classes being extended which are making for a mighty >mess when trying to get them to play together in a single project. It just >seems that there needs to be a little clarity on extending practice/purpose >and we need to get some clarity or development focus on an easier and more >configurable extending of struts. > >Is anyone else thinking what I am? > > >Brandon Goodin >Phase Web and Multimedia >P (406) 862-2245 >F (406) 862-0354 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.phase.ws > > > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
