On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Maurizio Cucchiara wrote: > Yep, IIRC the original author of Guice wrote the DI module which is > still in use. >
I *still* haven't looked at it, but I wonder if it'd be worth pulling out those guts and replacing it w/ the current version. > That's correct too, many of the S2 user prefer the XML approach > (myself included), since allows to do stuff like hot reload in > devMode, automated documentation, etc. > In fairness, we could create identical documentation with the annotations/convention, too, we just don't :) When Christian has talked about WebWork, I assumed he was referring to > the opensymphony stuff (like packaging, etc). Again, there has been > some debate over as well. > My current thought would be to have S2 subsume the package names, but still have the action framework itself decoupled from the web parts, as it is now, but bring the XW stuff under the S2 name... I can't think of a better alternative, anyway. Dave
