I have talked to a couple of people before and everyone seems to agree
that using guice instead of our internal IoC container (guice pre 1.0
I think), would be a good idea. I don't have any experience with guice
2.0, but looking at the docs it seems like porting our stuff would not
be that hard.
I'd suggest using Guice trunk and the JSR annotations rather than the Guice
annotations. I'd also make the injector pluggable so that people can plug in
Spring/Guice/etc easily.
-bp
On Dec 1, 2009, at 10:33 AM, Musachy Barroso wrote:
I have talked to a couple of people before and everyone
good point Brian, that has came up also. I have a couple of concerns
about it, like what is the status of the jsr and will the API
(annotations) will be under a decent (read ASF compatible license)
license and in maven central? which is usually a pain point when it
comes to Sun APIs.
musachy
On
They'll be part of the Guice distribution and under ASLv2 since Guice uses that.
The real question is how to setup the Injector's. I tend to think this layout
would be best:
Base
|
|
_
| |
| |
StrutsApp
I wouldn't have a problem with it as long as I can still swap in my trusty
Spring IoC container, I can't see my team moving away from it any time soon,
but I still want to try to stay as current as possible on Struts.
(*Chris*)
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Brian Pontarelli
this is not related to the application itself, you can still use any
IoC you want. This is for the IoC that is used internally to wire
struts internals together, which at the moment is an old version of
guice which is in xwork.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Chris Pratt thechrispr...@gmail.com
I don't see a clear distinction between the Struts injector and the
App injector. One thing to keep in mind is that user often request how
to access struts internal stuff, like action mapping etc, which in
theory should not happen, but it does.
musachy
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Brian
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Musachy Barroso musa...@gmail.com wrote:
this is not related to the application itself, you can still use any
IoC you want. This is for the IoC that is used internally to wire
struts internals together, which at the moment is an old version of
guice which is in
I was actually talking about expanding it out like Chris mentioned. I don't see
any reason why those who want to use the container that Struts is using
shouldn't be able to. Since the annotations and APIs will be standard across
Guice and Spring with the JSR, it seems like it would be possible
I have mixed feelings about it. making it pluggeable is not a priority
I would say. But if there are standard annotations for it now, then
there is no reason why we shouldn't use them. If the day comes when
guice is no longer supported (I don't really mean it crazybob :)), it
would be easier to
Because you don't want to use separate containers. In Guice you can have
child-parent injector relationships. My thought is to just have a single DI
container that builds everything. Struts no longer has any concept of an
ObjectFactory and doesn't create actions or anything like that. It would
ah I see what you mean. yes that would be a good idea, I think that
would work as long as all the containers have what we need, which I am
not sure if it is in the spec or not (havent read it), like:
* create/inject objects and statics (duh)
* lookup all implementation by type
that's all I can
We could probably make a list and verify. I think the API should be pretty
comprehensive about a lot of those things.
-bp
On Dec 1, 2009, at 11:42 AM, Musachy Barroso wrote:
ah I see what you mean. yes that would be a good idea, I think that
would work as long as all the containers have
It is good that you brought this up, because the double object factory
is annoying and creates a lot of unexpected situations(problems with
class reloading and OSGi). Having just one container would make it
easier for everybody, users and s2 developers, if it can be pulled
off.
This kind of
Hi All,
I am using Struts2 redirectAction result type as follows -
result name=y type=redirectAction
x_viewReport.action
true
${projectId}
${contractId}
${workOrderId}
${contactId}
${samplePlanId}
${selectionCriteria}
${barcodes}
/result
Barcodes parameter is an user input and if it
I am reading the spec and I am rather impressed, I thought it would be
a simple thing but it is really comprehensive. I doubt we will have a
use case that won't be covered there.
musachy
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Musachy Barroso musa...@gmail.com wrote:
It is good that you brought this
16 matches
Mail list logo
