Sounds fine for me. Cedric
----- Original Message ----- From: "James Mitchell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org> Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 6:06 AM Subject: Re: Initial checkin of standalone Tiles > That sounds great. Given the commit activity as of late, I doubt > there will be anyone putting their tiles updates on hold while this > happens ;) > > > -- > James Mitchell > Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist > Consulting / Mentoring / Freelance > EdgeTech, Inc. > http://www.edgetechservices.net/ > 678.910.8017 > AIM: jmitchtx > Yahoo: jmitchtx > MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Skype: jmitchtx > > > > On Jul 13, 2005, at 5:04 PM, Craig McClanahan wrote: > > > On 6/15/05, James Holmes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> I'm with Martin and Niall. > >> > > > > Having looked at this some more, I agree as well, and I'm willing to > > do the work. The proposed plan is to: > > > > * "svn mv" the current contents of "sandbox/tiles" to someplace > > archival > > until the remaining steps are complete. > > > > * "svn copy" to establish the initial code base for "sandbox/tiles" > > from the > > trunk version of "tiles" (i.e. the latest and greatest version > > that is used > > in development releases of Struts). > > > > * Refactor the package names, taking into account the feedback above. > > In particular: > > - Base package name will be "org.apache.tiles". > > - Tag library classes will be "org.apache.tiles.taglib" > > - Any utility classes that are needed from Struts > > will be "svn copy"d into "org.apache.tiles.util". > > > > * Add in appropriate versions of the old DTDs so that validating > > the definitions > > file does not attempt to access the Internet. > > > > * Establish a new (version 1.2) DTD so that standalone Tiles can > > diverge > > in the future if it needs to, without messing up the DTDs used > > for 1.0 and 1.1 > > based applications. > > > > * When all is well, get rid of the previously archived version > > of "sandbox/tiles". > > > > Does this sound like a reasonable plan? > > > > Craig > > > > > > > >> > >> James > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Martin Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 11:36 AM > >> To: Struts Developers List > >> Subject: Re: Initial checkin of standalone Tiles > >> > >> I agree with all of Niall's points below. I'm especially concerned > >> at the > >> loss of history mentioned in #2, since history can be so important. > >> > >> -- > >> Martin Cooper > >> > >> > >> On Wed, 15 Jun 2005, Niall Pemberton wrote: > >> > >> > >>> I have a few concerns/questions about the initial checkin of > >>> standalone > >>> Tiles into the sandbox, which David indicates in the SVN log is > >>> extracted > >>> from Struts 1.1: > >>> > >>> 1) I'm wondering why this is based on Struts 1.1, rather than the > >>> current > >>> version of tiles code? I did a quick scan (for starters) of the > >>> tiles > >>> > >> taglib > >> > >>> and while there hasn't been a large amount of activity since > >>> Struts 1.1 > >>> there have been some bug fixes and some other minor changes and > >>> it seems a > >>> shame to have to redo these changes rather than copying the current > >>> versions. > >>> > >>> 2) IMO it would be better to use SVN copy to create the initial > >>> code base > >>> > >> - > >> > >>> seems a shame to loose all the subversion history by adding these > >>> as new > >>> artefacts. Since we have Struts 1.1 versions tagged they could > >>> be copied > >>> either from the current versions or the Struts 1.1 versions. > >>> > >>> 3) The taglib package has been renamed to > >>> "org.apache.taglib.tiles" - I'm > >>> wondering if this will create a confusion with the Jakarta > >>> Taglibs project > >>> which uses "org.apache.taglibs.???" package name? Would this not > >>> be better > >>> and more consistent as "org.apache.tiles.taglib"? > >>> > >>> 4) Similar question about the message resources which are being > >>> duplicated > >>> from Struts - are we OK to use the "org.apache.util" package name > >>> for > >>> > >> these > >> > >>> classes rather than "org.apache.tiles.util"? Also, its probably > >>> another > >>> discussion, but maybe these need to be replaced with something else > >>> > >> (commons > >> > >>> resources?) rather than duplicating from struts. > >>> > >>> Niall > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> - > >>> 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] > >> > >> > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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] > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.14/48 - Release Date: 13/07/2005 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
