+1 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason Carreira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 9:18 AM Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] Partition XWork [Was: Re: XWork flux]
> See > > http://www.opensymphony.com:8668/space/XWork+1.0+Mission+Statement > > And > > http://www.opensymphony.com:8668/space/WebWork%202.0%20Mission%20Statement > > Basically, Xwork is going to be the core generic command pattern implementation. Webwork 2.0 is going to be an MVC framework tailored for the web and built on Xwork 1.0. > > So the real question here is whether it makes sense to partition Webwork 2.0 into: > > Webwork-core > Webwork-el > Webwork-jsp > Webwork-velocity > Webwork-xslt > Webwork-jasperreports > Webwork-freemarket > > There may be later extensions to Xwork as well (JMSWork?, MailWork?). > > Personally, I think Webwork is small enough to stand as one module with all of the view types included. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Philipp Meier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 12:02 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: [OS-webwork] Partition XWork [Was: Re: XWork flux] > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 07:37:45AM -0800, Jason Carreira wrote: > > > > > Oh, other than the ThreadLocal thing, there are also remaining > > > questions about Ognl and whether we can plug in our EL, or > > whether it > > > should be undertaken to re-architect our existing EL for > > performance. > > > > I want to propose to partition the xwork in several > > (independent) modules. Because I e.g. do not use jsp or > > velicity, and because I do not contribute to the development, > > it would be nice to seperate them from the core stuff. It > > makes sense to me to have the following cvs modules: > > > > * xwork (or xwork-core) > > * xwork-web (ServletDispatcher and FilterDispatcher and so on.) > > * xwork-view-el (used by jsp and velocity) > > * xwork-view-jsp > > * xwork-view-velocity > > * xwork-view-xslt > > * xwork-view-freemarker > > * xwork-jms (Dispatcher and helpers for JMS) > > * xwork-mail (Dispatcher and helpers for Mail) > > > > Does this make sense? I see xwork growing and growing and > > becoming more and more confusing. On the other hand, size > > does matter and we must consider that every view type needs > > it's supporting libraries. > > > > My €0.02, > > -billy. > > > > -- > > Meisterbohne Söflinger Straße 100 Tel: > > +49-731-399 499-0 > > eLösungen 89077 Ulm Fax: > > +49-731-399 499-9 > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld http://www.vasoftware.com > _______________________________________________ > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
