Nils,
This is a great start. I had wanted to do this myself, but I never
found the time. I only took a brief look at the patch, but a few things
jumped out at me:
1. I'm not sure the UrlRendererFactory is needed. I believe the whole
purpose of guice is to not have anymore factories anymore, so guice
should just inject the necessary UrlRenderer. (especially if they are
stateless)
2. As a first step in separating out the url building logic I like how
you have the form url building seperate from the typical url building.
I tried to combine these and couldn't find a clean way to resolve the
differences.
HTH,
Tom
I have finally been able to extract the portlet code into a plugin,
but it required some "shortcuts" due to couplings between the
Components (URL, Form and it's super classes) and generating the URLs.
But at least all tests pass, and there are no more dependencies to the
portlet API in the core. I have attached the files as patches to the
JIRA ticket (https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-1645), since
it needs a review and probably some discussion.
Nils-H
On 4/11/07, Nils-Helge Garli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have started the process of moving the portlet code to a plugin. But
any further progress requires the url building abstraction discussed
earlier. What is the status for this code?
Also, I think the code in general would benefit from a common
abstraction of the servlet- and portlet types (request, response,
context etc). It would most certainly reduce the amount of "almost
duplicated" code needed to operate Struts in a portlet.
Nils-H
On 3/26/07, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The trunk is the correct place (we branched for 2.0.x).
>
> On 3/25/07, Nils-Helge Garli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I want to start looking into moving the portlet support to a plugin,
> > but need a little guidance to get started.
> >
> > - What is the status of refactoring the URL-building, as
discussed in
> > previous mail threads?
> > - From what I understand, a "hook" for injecting a URL builder
> > implementation from the plugin must be provided. How is that
achieved?
> > - Is trunk the correct place to work on, or will a 2.1.x branch
be created?
> >
> > Nils-H
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
