I haven't looked at your actual implementation, but my gut feel is that we need to be careful about adding new elements to the struts-config.xml - the simpler the better IMO. Maybe there are alternative mechanisms that achieve the same goal. Martin suggested ChainAction in that thread (for Struts 1.3) - another, Struts 1.2, option would be to use a Tiles Controller.
http://struts.apache.org/api/org/apache/struts/tiles/Controller.html At the end of the day its a bit chicken and egg as far as contributions and committers go. If you post an idea, people say "code talks" - if you go to the trouble of doing the code (as you did), its disheartening to get either no reaction or a -ve one. Its a bit hit and miss whether you're going to find anyone with either the desire or time to plug in what you produce (I've had very little over the last few months). Back porting to 1.2 is more effort so the same goes. Personally, once I switch over to 1.3 the motivation for me to duplicate work on 1.2 will not be that high. By far the largest part of the effort (IMO) is not sticking the code/patches in, its testing and (probably, coz I haven't done it) actually going through the release process. Niall ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank W. Zammetti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 4:16 PM > That kind of begs the question... if I were to implement what I did in > 1.3, would there then be interest from the committers? I think there was > a reasonable amount of interest expressed by the user community for what I > did, and if its just a matter of porting it to 1.3, then there is an > opening here for me. And assuming that was the case, would there then > still be a problem adding it to 1.2? If there was going to be no > compatibility issue between 1.2 and 1.3, would there still be resistance > to adding it to 1.2 as well as 1.3? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
