Wow, Ted this is looking great! I really like the new organization, as
it is very easy to follow. I especially appreciate the work you've put
into the Tutorial section, as that has always been a weak area in the WW
docs.
Patrick, we need to get that snippet macro working with the new
Wendy Smoak wrote:
I organized action2 into the usual branches/tags/trunk structure, and
added it to the 'current' external.
Then I noticed a few jar files as things scrolled by during an update.
Can any of these be removed?
~/svn/struts/current/action2
$ find . -name *.jar
I vote for Beta, due to the missing TLD from the tiles jar. Otherwise, I think
it is GA quality.
I believe Wendy is going to roll 1.3.4 in the next day or so, so everyone
_please_ test this release and report problems _before_ 1.3.4 so we can have a
smooth GA vote.
Thanks Wendy,
Don
Patrick should jump in here, but I believe he's set it up so that you can
generate your IDEA configuration from Maven automatically, so we don't have to
have checked in files.
http://confluence.twdata.org/display/WW/Building+with+Maven
Don
Ted Husted wrote:
Moving forward, I'd favor
The Apache Struts project and the members of the OpenSymphony WebWork
2 project are coming together to create the next-generation
action-based web application framework, Struts Action 2. Since the
merger announcement, the WebWork 2.2.2 code has successfully passed
the Apache Incubator to seed the
Yeah, I hadn't done that previously as I'm not sure my poor server
could handle the load, and the fact ASF infrastructure is balking at
running a live Confluence doesn't add confidence :)
Don
On 5/8/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5/8/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Website
Wendy Smoak wrote:
The jar manifests now have 'Apache Struts Action 1 Framework' as the
Specification-Title. (Change struts/action/pom.xml if you prefer
something else.)
The more I think about it, the more I don't like this title. I think it
should be: Apache Struts Action. Action 2 should
Action Framework 2. Let
it be settled then.
Don
Ted Husted wrote:
In the documentation, we've been referring to Struts Action Framework
2 to correlate with the common acronym SAF2.
I would agreed that there's no obvious reason to retrofit the numeral to
SAF.
-Ted.
On 5/9/06, Don Brown [EMAIL
Michael Jouravlev wrote:
Don't we want to learn on others' mistakes? Or this *is* a plan for
Struts, to rename SAF2 to SAF sometime?
I agree with our historical approach to this: let time decide. If Struts Action
2 is widely accepted and supplants 1 in terms of usage and developer activity,
GA - This looks really good Wendy, thanks again for the hard work!
Don
Wendy Smoak wrote:
The Struts Action Framework 1.3.4 Test Build is available to evaluate
for release quality.
The release plan is available on the wiki:
http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsActionRelease134
The test
+1 too, while there are always improvements to be made, this looks
good enough for a release. Thanks again!
Don
On 5/10/06, Greg Reddin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1. Thanks for all your hard work on this build stuff :-)
Greg
On May 10, 2006, at 3:24 AM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
In advance of a
We will be having an unofficial Struts BOF at JavaOne with the purpose of
discussing the technical directions of the Struts project. I intend this to be
more of a working group meeting and discussion than a presentation, so please
come prepared to discuss roadmaps and hammer out feature ideas
and the
conclusion arrived at. That would really help people who can't make it
catch-up. Thx
rgds
- Original Message
From: Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Struts Developers List dev@struts.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, 11 May, 2006 12:18:02 AM
Subject: [ANN] Struts BOF Wednesday, 5:30 PM, at JavaOne
I didn't know we decided to change that, as it has repercussions all throughout
the Maven build. I'm fine with us changing it for the next release, but I
certainly don't think it should stand in the way of this one.
Don
Joe Germuska wrote:
This seems like the smallest of things, but the
Normally, I'd agree with you but:
a) This is the latest in a succession of very recent releases so little
has changed (last one was Sunday)
b) Theoretically people test during that week, but in practice few do.
Seems people don't pay attention until a vote is called
We can always recall a
Niall Pemberton wrote:
To summarise then my vote is beta because I believe I think we're
introducing an uncessaey PITA for users upgrading and it will increase
questions on the user list and put additional load on the Apache
Servers.
I absolutely disagree. To be GA quality, it doesn't have to
Joe Germuska wrote:
I have taken some time to check out the 1.3.4 version today -
upgrading my webapp to this version (was on 1.2.9) and the only other
issue(s) I came up with is that we used to distribute things like the
validator-rules.xml config and taglib tlds in the lib directory. I
This is great news! Thanks for the detailed writeup, as it is very encouraging
to see a project that was designed purely for 1.5 was able to be so quickly
transformed to run on 1.4.
Please keep us posted with any additional issues that arise.
Don
Tim Fennell wrote:
Hi All,
I remember a
Craig McClanahan wrote:
However, I would be unhappy with
all of us other committers if we stopped testing 1.3.4 at all, until
1.3.5became available, and we surface yet another two line change next
week.
This is exactly why I think this release process, or least least the
Struts PMC
There was talk about the Geronimo party, afterwards at the W.
Otherwise, Tuesday evening at the Thirsty Bear after the blogger meetup
would work nicely. The beer-drinking bof is traditionally organized
by Van, and he's been pretty busy lately.
Don
Peter Pilgrim wrote:
Hi Guys
I just here
Sounds good to me...I'll give it a try today
Don
Rainer Hermanns wrote:
Hey,
just saw that Dojo released version 0.30. Our Dojo support in SAF/WW
2.2.x is currently based on the outdated 0.21 release.
Shouldn't we update the embedded Dojo release and try to get our ajax
tags running
Actually, if you wouldn't mind, I need a ride too. My flight comes in at 3:50
so 5:45 would work great for me. If you have room, Wendy Smoak might also be
interested in catching a ride. Yes, yes, we'd all owe you a beer or two :)
Don
David Evans wrote:
This may seem a little off the wall,
What I dislike is spending untold personal hours fixing all known
issues and putting out a release, only to have it continually shot
down, not available to anyone. Specifically:
1. Our release plan states we only make GA's available on the mirrors
and from the download page, so anything less is
On 5/16/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I won't cast a quality vote on anything but a tagged and rolled,
downloadable distribution. Many of the problems we've had in the past
(not just this time, but with other series too) appear in the final
product and are not evident in a checkout.
On 5/17/06, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree with Ted and Paul that we should only vote on the actual
signed distribution that's going to be uploaded. It's easy to imagine
accidentally introduce a problem when you're building the final
distribution. I wouldn't be comfortable
I'm getting compile errors trying to build action 2. Toby, is there
any code you haven't committed yet?
Don
[INFO] Compilation failure
/home/mrdon/dev/struts/action2/core/src/main/java/org/apache/struts/action2/components/Form.java:[44,42]
cannot find symbol
symbol : class
to be in the local repository, the compilation for
action2 should work.
I'll try it my local machine. It seems to be ok the last time I tried it. But
let me just double check. :-) Do post back with your findings Don. Thx.
- Original Message
From: Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Struts Developers
Yeah, I had a problem with that one. I found it in some maven repo, but
Maven 2 wasn't pulling it down, so I had to install it manually. Are
you saying I just had the group id wrong?
Don
Wendy Smoak wrote:
What repo is MyFaces coming from? On ibiblio it looks like the
groupId for v1.1.2
After talking with several on this list about the possibility of
combining the best of JSF and Action 2 in a unified framework from a
user perspective, I have completed a first cut at JSF support in Action
2 with this loftly goal.
From a user perspective, you still have one configuration
Jason Carreira wrote:
Great work Don! This is very cool. I've been saying we could do this for a long
time, but it's good to know I wasn't just making that up :-)
Heh, I know. After bragging about it after many beers at JavaOne, I
figured it was time to put up or shut up :)
I think it's
Wendy Smoak wrote:
I published snapshots with 'mvn deploy':
http://people.apache.org/maven-snapshot-repository/org/apache/struts/action2/
What about 'extras'? It seems like the profile needs to be split up.
Right now if I do 'mvn deploy -P extras' it's going to upload the both
is forced an you, making it very
easy to override or set other defaults as needed.
Don
Good work in any case Don, I look forward to seeing this polished!
Frank
Don Brown wrote:
Jason Carreira wrote:
Great work Don! This is very cool. I've been saying we could do this
for a long time
that possibility,
more or less. Just curious, because I've only done one Webwork
project thus far, and it's relatively basic, so I didn't have a need
for this capability.
Frank
Don Brown wrote:
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
I've been historically pretty anti-JSF, so I hope this means
something in light
Agreed. Are we going to move XWork to Subversion for 2.0 or stick with
CVS for now?
Don
Jason Carreira wrote:
So on the plane home I was able to get some work done. Well, first I had to set
up lots of libraries for the extras and showcase modules, since maven didn't
set them up, but then
It is acceptable to distribute CDDL code in binary form, so RIFE isn't a
problem.
Don
Rainer Hermanns wrote:
Regardless, showcase should be split up so we can ship a functional app
with no LGPL problems.
Don, I just removed the deps on JasperReports which were the last real
LGPL code
In the Action 2 approach, you should be able to use any feature of
Shale, or any other JSF extension, that doesn't involve a custom
NavigationHandler, since that is overridden to defer to Action 2-style
navigation, or a custom Lifecycle. By leaving JSF alone otherwise, you
should be able to
For the 2.0 XWork branch, why not branch off 1.x so we can keep trunk for
current development? This way, we don't have to change our current checked out
code :)
Don
Patrick Lightbody wrote:
Let's leave XW at OpenSymphony for now - as we know there is a lot of work to
be focussed on when
Sorry, it should be fixed. We just arrived in Sydney from New Zealand,
and you wouldn't believe how hard it is to find a computer that allows ssh
out (log file filled up and shut down apache).
Don
The SAF2 wiki seems to be down. It's a rainy day here, and I might get
a chance to do a nip of
The root issue is how to handle optional interceptors. Currently, I believe we
do print out stack traces, but only at a debug level, and the processing of the
configuration continues.
I'd like to be able to include optional interceptors in the struts-default.xml
file, as it makes it easier
The Jasper result was in fact transitioned to Struts Action 2, however, it was
moved to the extras module. ASF is ok with us shipping code that depends on
LGPL jars as long as:
1. The jars aren't included in our distribution
2. The default build doesn't automatically retrieve the jars
3.
The webwork renaming issue goes deeper than just those 3 or so files
and affects things like template variables, the static resources
prefix, the dojo package, etc. Currently, they have all be renamed to
'struts' consistently, however if we switched to 'struts-action' or
even 'action', I'm not
it drop, as we have other fish
to fry.
-Ted.
On 6/9/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The webwork renaming issue goes deeper than just those 3 or so files
and affects things like template variables, the static resources
prefix, the dojo package, etc. Currently, they have all be renamed
I changed the JIRA version to 2.0.0 and have started to pair down the
actual tickets we are signing up to resolve for 2.0.0. Please go
through the list of those improvements moved to Future and see if there
are any you'd be willing to tackle for this release. Also, I'll be
moving items from
With XWork now supporting wildcards in xwork.xml, I think it is time to
remove the explicit support for the fooAction!barMethod.action syntax.
From a reading of our tickets, the legacy support for that syntax is
affecting the framework in strange ways, and now that we have wildcards,
they can
a more ReST-ful
appearance.
Don
Bob Lee wrote:
I finally understand wildcards! Can you give an example of using more
than one wildcard in an action name?
Bob
On 6/11/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With XWork now supporting wildcards in xwork.xml, I think it is time to
remove
Ted Husted wrote:
On 6/11/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thoughts?
We used the ! idiom extensively in the WW MailReader and WW CookBook
in the sandbox. I'll update those for the latest build to see how
effective if the wildcard workaound.
Are we going to introduce wildcard support
Ted Husted wrote:
On 6/9/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, I'll be
moving items from our TODO lists over to issues so be prepared for more
emails :)
Which TODO lists?
I'm thinking of all the rough spots and that short list of features on the
release plan.
This JIRA report [1
work!
Don
Ted Husted wrote:
On 6/12/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm thinking of all the rough spots and that short list of features
on the
release plan.
I setup issues for the short list, but not every rough spot. Anyone
who is ready, willing, and able to work on any of the others
What do you mean? Every action would have the option to use this
pattern. How would we set it as the default for all actions?
Don
Patrick Lightbody wrote:
Don,
I'm totally in favor of that, but only if we make sure that
struts-action-default.xml (originally webwork-default.xml) includes
What about doing what Sun does with Xalan for Java 5 and rename XWork
packages? With the changes we are making to XWork 2.0, I don't think
it will co-exist with WebWork 2.2.2/3 very well, if at all.
Therefore:
com.opensymphony.xwork
will become:
:01 PM, Don Brown wrote:
What about doing what Sun does with Xalan for Java 5 and rename XWork
packages? With the changes we are making to XWork 2.0, I don't think
it will co-exist with WebWork 2.2.2/3 very well, if at all.
Therefore:
com.opensymphony.xwork
will become
I'd be fine with that too.
Don
Patrick Lightbody wrote:
How about com.opensymphony.xwork2? :)
-
Posted via Jive Forums
http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=34229messageID=66656#66656
Very tempting if it wasn't GPL :(
Don
Bob Lee wrote:
We should use jarjar: http://tonicsystems.com/products/jarjar/
Bob
On 6/13/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about doing what Sun does with Xalan for Java 5 and rename XWork
packages? With the changes we are making to XWork 2.0
Don't forget to associate a JIRA ticket with each commit to make it easier to
track changes in a release... :)
Thanks,
Don
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: tmjee
Date: Wed Jun 14 06:48:08 2006
New Revision: 414249
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=414249view=rev
Log:
- added javadoc
I'm fine with combining the tasks as long as they are all resolved in one fell
swoop. Considering we generally have little spare time to work on open source
projects, I'd like to see tickets at a level of granularity that it only
requires a few hours to resolve them, avoiding the basically
be distrubuted. If it's a big issue,
I'm sure we can talk Chris into something. Chris?
On 6/13/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Very tempting if it wasn't GPL :(
Bob Lee wrote:
We should use jarjar: http://tonicsystems.com/products/jarjar
to create a jira issue even if its just changing some javadoc, like
typo or snippet id is wrongly assigned etc.?
regards.
- Original Message
From: Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: dev@struts.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, 15 June, 2006 1:16:48 AM
Subject: Re: svn commit: r414249 -
/struts/action2
] wrote:
Okie dokie. Thx for the reminder.
Do we need to create a jira issue even if its just changing some
javadoc, like typo or snippet id is wrongly assigned etc.?
regards.
- Original Message
From: Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: dev@struts.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, 15 June
Craig McClanahan wrote:
While looking into this, I noticed that the pom.xml for action2 still has
two references to http://cvs.apache.org that need to be switched to
http://people.apache.org. Mind if I go ahead and change them?
Please feel free. Thanks,
Don
Craig
Craig
Just like
My only concern is WW 2.2 migrations. If it will require them to
perform significant work (more than a simple rename), we should just
deprecate the feature and perhaps throw a warning. Otherwise, I think
we should remove it.
Don
tm jee wrote:
Hi guys,
Just want to confirm something. Is
At 10:11 AM -0700 6/19/06, Martin Cooper wrote:
I've had a ghost of an idea in my head that you could put a Servlet
in front of Dojo and serve it out of a JAR so that you had a more
clear idea of what was in the release -- I've never been too
comfortable with unpacking the distro and putting
As Shale and Action zero in on their first GA release, I don't think it is too
late to ask the question, Does Struts really need two frameworks? We have
been putting out the message, two frameworks, one community, for almost a year
now, but I still sense a lot of confusion and even rejection
Ted Husted wrote:
As for making the UI tags an independant extension, a al Tiles, that
sounds good too. (Even better if we include the value added Ajax
support.) But I don't know if we want to hold back the SAF 2.0.0 to
make it happen. But, for phase 2, sure!
Actually, I'm thinking splitting off
on that particular playground.
Craig McClanahan
On 6/20/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As Shale and Action zero in on their first GA release, I don't think
it is
too
late to ask the question, Does Struts really need two frameworks? We
have
been putting out the message, two frameworks, one community
subprojects: Shale, Action 2, and Action Tags.
Don
Don Brown wrote:
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
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,
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
it to drive even the example applications.
If we are worried that the AJAX themes might be a hold-up, then
perhaps it may be the AJAX themes that we want to package separately.
Can we treat themes like Maven or Eclipse plugins?
-Ted.
On 6/21/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, I'm thinking
for web development needs.
Don
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 multiple
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
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
://confluence.twdata.org/display/WW/Issues+and+Solutions
Peter Pilgrim wrote:
Don Brown (JIRA) wrote:
Remove AroundInterceptor and do* method support
---
Key: WW-1360
URL: http://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-1360
Project: Struts Action 2
Martin Cooper wrote:
These views, I suppose, would logically be pages if Struts were a
page-based controller. But I do find this kind of use-case always
cropping
into my apps, and one of my biggest problems is that when I do a save or
cancel, I have no automated stack that tells me what my
Interesting...I can see you have put a lot of time and thought into
this. My first pass seems to find this a cross between the portlet api
and JSF. What I saw missing from the articles and wiki pages is a
higher level justification:
- Why not just use portlets?
- Why not just use JSF?
-
similar to what we
are planning for Tiles. I'm fine with the event dispatching part of your
proposal, but I'm not convinced a new component framework should be added to
Struts Action 1 core.
Don
Michael Jouravlev wrote:
Don, thanks for replying. See inline.
On 6/25/06, Don Brown [EMAIL
With the departure of Struts Shale, I think it is time we return to the idea of
Struts as a single, unified framework. While I had hoped we could do this by
including Shale, everyone involved felt Shale deserved its own project and so
I'm adjusting my original Struts 2.0 proposal to simply
Wendy Smoak wrote:
On 6/28/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. We rename the https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/action
subversion
directory as https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/framework, keep
the other
top level directories the same
What do you think of...
repos/asf
I'm against official code names. We have had enough confusion in Struts with
different names meaning different things, and we shouldn't pile on more names.
If folks want to off-hand use code names, that's fine, but to have them used in
code or documentation is too far. Version 1 and 2 are
Ted Husted wrote:
Though, there's no reason why we couldn't use
repos/asf/struts/struts1
repos/asf/struts/struts2
Or
repos/asf/struts/framework
repos/asf/struts/framework2
I like struts1/struts2.
Don
-Ted.
[implied: 1] have version numbers higher than 1.x?
(theoretically yes, but that would be bizzare)
On 6/28/06, Bob Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 for Struts 2.0
Bob
On 6/28/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With the departure of Struts Shale, I think it is time we return to the
idea
If Struts 1 decided to go with Cintoo, I think it would be good for Struts 2 to
adopt it as well, as it would make migration easier, and reduce the number of
differences between the two versions. I'd like to take that approach with other
areas like validation and annotations in the future.
You need to click on the All Versions link, as JIRA thinks those three are the
next versions to be released.
Don
Paul Benedict wrote:
Does anyone know how to setup the roadmap on JIRA so we can see all the
fixed/outstanding defects that are going into 1.3.5? Right now the roadmap
contains
That's a file I put in xwork, but it says it was checked in. I'll look into it
more later when I get home.
Don
Bob Lee wrote:
Missing AbstractInterceptor. Anybody have any clues?
Bob
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
You might have noticed a bunch of commits, working to rename Struts
Action to Struts and adjust our builds and public site accordingly. The
new web page is currently in the processing of synching with the public
server. When that is done in an hour or so's time, please check out the
public
each commit with its ticket (WW-1367 and STR-2898) so
it should be easy to track.
Don
Don Brown wrote:
You might have noticed a bunch of commits, working to rename Struts
Action to Struts and adjust our builds and public site accordingly.
The new web page is currently in the processing
been tagging each commit with its ticket (WW-1367 and STR-2898)
so it should be easy to track.
Don
Don Brown wrote:
You might have noticed a bunch of commits, working to rename Struts
Action to Struts and adjust our builds and public site
accordingly. The new web page is currently
+1
James Mitchell wrote:
+1
--
James Mitchell
On Jul 5, 2006, at 1:05 AM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
It's time to release version 3 of the struts-master pom:
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/maven/trunk/pom/pom.xml
This is the master pom from which struts-parent inherits, and it needs
for the user to
guess and remember.
Don
Ted Husted wrote:
On 7/1/06, Don Brown (JIRA) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rename Struts Action 1 to Struts 1
If we are using struts1 and struts2 for the repository folders
(which is fine with me), why are we using 1.x and 2.0 for the
website folders?
* http
I think you are over-thinking this one. Struts is a single product with
multiple versions. Since both are still developed, at times, it is helpful to
refer to Struts 2.0 as Struts 2 and Struts 1.x as Struts 1, but these names are
really optional and a tool to help clarify versions. In the
isn't and shouldn't be versioned. This is
the code in struts/site. The versioning discussion is regarding the generated
site docs from each Struts version.
In summary, I think the solution you propose solves all the issues nicely.
Don
Ted Husted wrote:
On 7/5/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED
, with action (1.x) and action2
(2.x) being specific implementations.
Well, not that the renaming is done, I think we have no normal way of sharing code across packages. Thoughts?
-- Paul
Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/1/06, Don Brown (JIRA) wrote:
Rename Struts Action 1 to Struts 1
release.
Don
Craig McClanahan wrote:
On 7/5/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good question. Here are the options of the top of my head:
- Jakarta Commons project
- Put it in Struts 1.x, since Struts 2 will probably have 1 has a dep
for
migration code
- Create new Struts Commons
With the ditching of the name Struts Action Framework went our saf:
taglib prefix. For the new one, I want to use simply s:, but I
thought I'd run it by everyone first.
Also, please review the outstanding tickets and see if any are missing,
or better yet, see if any you'd be willing to fix.
I'd like to remove the Ant build from Struts 2. I don't think it has
worked for a little while and the new Maven 2 layout discourages it for
any complex builds. Unless someone seriously wants to put the effort
into keeping it up, I think it should be removed.
Don
XWork so Struts 2 users don't
use XWork directly at all?
Thanks,
Gabe
- Original Message
From: Don Brown (JIRA) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: issues@struts.apache.org
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 1:21:16 AM
Subject: [jira] Resolved: (WW-1376) Struts configuration files should be named
struts.xml
I thought about it, but this follows the xwork naming convention, something that
migrating users will care about. Also, I always thought using underscores was
unintuitive, but if others feel strongly about it, it could be changed.
Don
Wendy Smoak wrote:
On 7/10/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL
the
effort. Any developer whom needs to patch the source is going to be
able to handle maven.
Just my .02.
Cheers,
Eric
On 7/10/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don Brown proposed:
I'd like to remove the Ant build from Struts 2. I don't think it has
worked for a little while
You need to clear your local copy of xwork, most likely.
Don
Bob Lee wrote:
Anyone know what's causing this? I grepped for com.opensymphony.xwork.
and
ConfigurationProvider but the culprit wasn't immediately clear.
---
T E S T S
The web site directory already matches the artifact id, IIRC. I
thought your original complaint was about how Maven dealt with the
/1.x prefix.
Don
On 7/11/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/11/06, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's (somehow) related to the
201 - 300 of 1487 matches
Mail list logo
