Hi
I have already filed an RFE for this sort of behaviour in jira. My proposal is
to have some sort of way of notifying the viewcontroller/ or an ability to
query the statemachine, that some user action occurred to the statemachine that
causes it to become out of sync.
Hermod
-Original
Can you give the RFE #id so that I can add my comments ?
Dom
Hi
I have already filed an RFE for this sort of behaviour in jira. My proposal
is to have some sort of way of notifying the viewcontroller/ or an ability to
query the statemachine, that some user action occurred to the
Hi
http://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/SHALE-175
Hermod
-Original Message-
From: dominique.jean-prost [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 9:24 AM
To: dev
Subject: RE: [Shale] IllegalArgumentException when not synchronized with
statemachine
Can you give the RFE
Hi everybody!
I've read this thread a couple of times, because I was having a
somehow weird sentiment while doing it. Now, I think I have figured it
out :-). So, please bear with me for the short following paragraphs (I
am not a good writer yet):
1. even if I don't know too many details about
If you have the time and inclination to make it so over the next
four weeks, you won't get any push-back from me :). Though, I don't
see how we could publish SAF 2.0.0 without bundling the UI Tags and be
able to use it to drive even the example applications.
If we are worried that the AJAX
First of all I am not sure why so many thread forked from the initial
discussion. This will make a lot more difficult to figure out what was
already said, and towards what conclusion we are moving.
For your comments my answer is simple:
that's exactly the opposite of what and how RoR has gain
On 6/21/06, Alexandru Popescu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you think this can be done with the big-package-solves-everything
approach, than I am oke with it.
Hmmm, you can have both. If people are interested in RoR simplicity,
then why not create an Action-on-Rails distribution that configures
On 6/21/06, Alexandru Popescu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First of all I am not sure why so many thread forked from the initial
discussion. This will make a lot more difficult to figure out what was
already said, and towards what conclusion we are moving.
Because the thread introduced two
Ted, as I was afraid, you are unfortunately, interpretting wrongly my
message. RoR is not about dumb-distro, nor my intention/hope to have
something very simple in the Java world.
As for we can built different distributions and things like this: I
would definitely try to be objective: we are
The reason there are both Action and Shale frameworks is because we
didn't know how to support JSF in Action. We're finally starting to
make some headway on that score. Now what do we need to do to finish
the job?
If the job is finished, then is someone up to showing us the code by
driving the
If the goal is to separate the life cycles or to share code, then I am
all for it.
But I don't think the end users perception is going to be any different
by this proposed change. The question is still going to be are we
going to use a JSF or action framework? Struts is not advocating a
The short answer is that no, as long as I have any say in it, Shale will not
morph to be dependent on Action2. SAF2 is too heavyweight and too
complexfor my tastes (see below for more about that remark), besdes the fact
that it implements a lot of stuff that is redundant to what is already part
On 6/15/06, Niall Pemberton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/15/06, Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, June 15, 2006 6:35 am, Ted Husted wrote:
In the meantime, that would give Frank time to work on those patches.
So you don't want to wait for GA now? That's fine with me...
On 6/21/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If that means a (hopefully amicable) divorce, then so be it.
If that's what the people working on Shale want, I doubt that the PMC
would oppose a change of venue.
If that is the case, then the next question would be whether Shale
would be
Craig, thanks for your honesty and candor. I know this is a delicate
topic, and I appreciate you approaching the topic openly.
A couple of clarifications:
1. I'm not proposing Shale _ever_ depend on Action 2, only that they
should work well together. In fact, I mean to start including
On 6/21/06, Niall Pemberton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately doesn't look like I'm going to find time to do this,
I can make time in the first week of July, and it doesn't sound like
anyone else will have time before then. So if anyone wants to drum up
some checkstyle patches, it looks
On 6/21/06, Juan Ara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The point is, provide an easy way to do things with JSF in a plugable
fashion: use it or not, use it our way or not, but if you use it our
way, well... there must be any benefit!
Yes, it's always been a technical problem. We accepted Shale as a
One other point of clarification I forgot - this proposal would have no effect
on the Struts Shale project from a code or release perspective. The Struts
Shale project would continue, put out its releases, and continue to support JSF
applications.
I'm really only suggesting we wrap it all
...we're dealing with the ramifications of dismantling Jakarta from years
ago.I actually think that this situation would have never arose if
Struts and Shale were two sibling subprojects in a larger Jakarta project.
But, the Board spoke years ago, and umbrella projects were broken up because
Tim O'Brien wrote:
There is obviously a good deal
of exchange, but the frameworks compete (not my words).
While this may be true politically, from a code perspective, I completely
disagree. Just about every feature of Shale, AFAIK can easily be used with
Action 2: Spring integration, clay,
On 6/21/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I put this proposal out to help bring us together,
not precipitate a divorce :)
We're not divorcing Tiles. Neither did we divorce any of the
components that now live in the commons. We believed each of these
codebase could attract a larger
Comments interspersed.
On 6/21/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Craig, thanks for your honesty and candor. I know this is a delicate
topic, and I appreciate you approaching the topic openly.
LIkewise ... I may have sounded a bit grumpy in my response, but I don't
ascribe any
I'll see what I can do over the weekend...
Frank
Ted Husted wrote:
On 6/21/06, Niall Pemberton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately doesn't look like I'm going to find time to do this,
I can make time in the first week of July, and it doesn't sound like
anyone else will have time before
You make a lot of good points, and a strong argument for rallying around the JSF
flag. To this end, Shale is a great idea and provides a nice realization of
this approach. Undoubtedly, there are many developers who think similarly and
may not ever be interested in the Action 2 controller, and
True, we would have to get the tags to GA before we could really release Struts
Action 2.0 anyways. The other reason to split them off is to make it clear
socially and politically that they are an alternative to JSF tags.
Still, it would be more work, so I'm fine with leaving them as they are
My requirement is to show a global error message.
I am using html-el:errors/ for this.
So it's showing all the errors that has been added to ActionErrors object.
But my requirement is if I have got only one error than show the error
message.
And if I have multiple errors, just show a Generic
On 6/21/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And this is why Shale needs to continue, and I'd argue, continue to exist as
part of the larger Struts community, and a step further, under a larger Struts
2.0 product. I think despite providing multiple alternatives and solutions,
there is a
On Jun 20, 2006, at 12:45 PM, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 6/20/06, James Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Craig and I were discussing a few offline items and one thing that
came up was how we currently publish the nightlies. We agree that
this is best discussed in public, so here I am :)
Got the solution ..
ActionErrors errors = new ActionErrors();
// For test purpose .. Adding Errors to the ActionErrors object
errors.add(ActionErrors.GLOBAL_ERROR, new ActionError(ERROR1));
errors.add(ActionErrors.GLOBAL_ERROR, new ActionError(ERROR2));
I am using html-el:errors/
and getting the question marks and en_US prepended with all the error
messages .. as below.
Why is that .. How can I avoid ???en_US.
???en_US.TEST ERROR1??? ???en_US.TEST ERROR2??? ???en_US.TEST ERROR3???
???en_US.TEST ERROR4???
Thanks For your Help.
-Sanjeeb
--
On 6/21/06, Sanjeeb Patel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am using html-el:errors/
and getting the question marks and en_US prepended with all the error
messages .. as below.
Why is that .. How can I avoid ???en_US.
Please post your questions on the user list.
See:
At 3:22 PM -0400 6/21/06, Ted Husted wrote:
On 6/21/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And this is why Shale needs to continue, and I'd argue, continue to exist as
part of the larger Struts community, and a step further, under a
larger Struts
2.0 product. I think despite providing
Ted Husted wrote:
So, in addition to including the Action 1.3 JARs in the SAF 2.0
release, essentially, you are suggesting that we also include the
Shale 1.x JARs in the same distribution, so that anyone obtaining SAF2
can use Action 1, Action 2, and/or Shale 1?
Even though Don hasn't answered
I'm suggesting something bigger: Struts 2.0. This release will come with SAF2,
Shale, Tags, and maybe Action 1.x for legacy reasons. We would continue to
develop SAF2, Shale, and Tags, but the world would just need to see Struts 2.0.
Its documentation will tie the projects together and
On 6/21/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm suggesting something bigger: Struts 2.0. This release will come with
SAF2,
Shale, Tags, and maybe Action 1.x for legacy reasons. We would continue
to
develop SAF2, Shale, and Tags, but the world would just need to see Struts
2.0.
Its
Craig McClanahan wrote:
On 6/21/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm suggesting something bigger: Struts 2.0. This release will come with
SAF2,
Shale, Tags, and maybe Action 1.x for legacy reasons. We would continue
to
develop SAF2, Shale, and Tags, but the world would just need to see
My quick thoughts: I think realistically either of the following two outcomes
are positive developments for everyone:
1) We move in the direction of Struts 2.0, which houses all SAF2 and Shale
and get back for it being OK for folks to say, I use Struts. We've all said
we want to work together
I don't see the point in bundling Shale into a Struts 2.0 distribution. No
offense to anyone who develops Shale, but when we have packages called
action2, it makes it pretty clear Shale is not Struts 2.0 -- only the action
framework. Separate frameworks, imo, get different names and
On 6/21/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It goes back to Struts' roots as a single solution for web development needs.
:) Hmmm, I think you would need to look to Matt Raible's stuff for that :)
Historically, people always *wanted* Struts to be a single solution,
but we always tried to
On 6/21/06, Patrick Lightbody [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2) Shale becomes a TLP. We continue to share code and ideas where it makes
sense,
Or, in other words, the same relationship we have with XWork, OGNL,
FreeMarker, JasperReports, and Dojo.
-Ted.
Ted Husted wrote:
If we wanted Struts 2.0 to be a true omnibus product, then it should
include a data access solution, a data indexing solution, a menuing
solution, a security solution, a wizard solution, and an (even better)
AJAX solution. We're not even coming close to bundling everything a
Paul Benedict wrote:
I don't see the point in bundling Shale into a Struts 2.0 distribution. No
offense to anyone who develops Shale, but when we have packages called
action2, it makes it pretty clear Shale is not Struts 2.0 -- only the action
framework. Separate frameworks, imo, get different
Ok, I've added Action 1, Action 2, and Shale to Continuum. We need
to decide on a schedule for regular builds.
@Sean or anyone who knows,
Can we do nightlies with Continuum? I didn't think that was
possible, but I seem to remember some discussion about it somewhere.
--
James Mitchell
On 6/21/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul Benedict wrote:
I don't see the point in bundling Shale into a Struts 2.0 distribution. No
offense to anyone who develops Shale, but when we have packages called
action2, it makes it pretty clear Shale is not Struts 2.0 -- only the action
Don, I suppose I generally agree with you I guess. The problem is, which
always seems to be the case here in this group, is that every year someone is
trying to answer the question: What is Struts really about? At first it was
an action framework, and then it was a JSF framework, and then
Comparing JSF to JSP, FTL, PDF, XLST is comparing apples and oranges.
That is like comparing Struts to PDF. Ridiculous!
On 6/21/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/21/06, Juan Ara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The point is, provide an easy way to do things with JSF in a plugable
fashion:
On 6/21/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Again, Struts Action and Struts Shale would both retain their separate projects,
codebases, and release cycles. Struts 2.0 is about building something on top of
our Struts efforts to create a unified front to users. Users don't care about
all the
Ted, do you have any preference on how the patches should come in? One
per package, one per source file, etc?
Frank
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
I'll see what I can do over the weekend...
Frank
Ted Husted wrote:
On 6/21/06, Niall Pemberton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately doesn't look
48 matches
Mail list logo
