On Nov 1, 2007 5:02 PM, Brian Pontarelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think there are two changes I'm going to make: > > 1. Remove smarturls.action.packages and replace this with > smarturls.action.package.identifiers, which is the list of identifiers > that package names must contain. This would default to > "action,actions,struts,struts2". This would require two annotations and > two properties to turn specific packages on and off.
What's the motivation for this change? What's wrong with a list of one or more base packages? I think in practice, people either setup a specific package for Struts Actions, or mix them in with other classes and use an "Action" suffix to distinguish them from other similar classes. (For example a Person entity class and a PersonAction class.) If people are using some other strange organizational scheme, I think it's all right to encourage people to use a more common scheme instead. I know a lot of people who refactored their database schemas to use Hibernate (and ended up with a better schema in the end). > 2. Remove the component.xml file handling for components and rely on > the changes in #1 to find actions and result locations for components. +1 > This would make it simpler to start working and create java-packages > that contain actions. Plus, it would support all the component > infrastructure that I need in a completely standard fashion. Could you explain what "component infrastructure" is needed? -Ted. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
