2.7 parsing works fine as a drop in replacement, but the bytecode compilation does not work out of the box. After enabling it I got a lot of tests failing.
musachy On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Musachy Barroso<musa...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2.7 has been out for a while, so it should not be *that* risky, but I > wouldn't include it in 2.1.8 with such a short notice and no testing. > > musachy > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Dale Newfield<d...@newfield.org> wrote: >> Musachy Barroso wrote: >>> >>> I did some more checking and it looks good. I would say after 2.1.8 >>> gets released, we create the 2.1 branch and start working on 2.2, >>> which would use OGNL 2.7, how does that sound? >> >> I'm gonna start using 2.7(.3) now. I think I had reverted from 2.7 to 2.6 >> as a result of this exchange: >> http://www.nabble.com/Slow-performance-with-Struts2-td18092204.html . >> >> I thought we were already updating lots of other dependencies for 2.1.8? >> >> I understand that there might be code changes in struts that would allow us >> to benefit from some of the speedups in 2.7 (which would best go into 2.2), >> but if it neither breaks anything nor slows anything down with just a jar >> change, any reason to wait? (Your caching issue is one, but adding that >> doNotCache flag seems like a reasonable workaround for now...) >> >> -Dale >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@struts.apache.org >> >> > > > > -- > "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd > -- "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@struts.apache.org
