I think the comments are very valid from a theoretical pov, and I was opposed to the Command-driven pattern as a means of convenience. However, as our project progressed, the number of classes increased tremendously because of the inheritence model for shared data. The structure made it difficult for all the team members to easily grasp, and the maintenance of the project was becoming difficult.
I see this as one of the many situations where cs theory is counter-productive to the practical needs of the software developer. The command-driven actions proved to be very convenient and useful for simplifying our models. We have no lack of security control, it just resides programatically in our actions. If this was implemented via interceptors, the configuration should be able to easily be applied to command-driven methods as well. However, I view declarative security as another of those theory vs. practicality issues. ;-) > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Aleksandar Seovic > Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 9:52 PM > I've been following this list for a while now and I really like > most of the > stuff I've seen. However, I don't believe that removal of Action interface > is a move in the right direction, for several reasons. > <snip> ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SlickEdit Inc. Develop an edge. The most comprehensive and flexible code editor you can use. Code faster. C/C++, C#, Java, HTML, XML, many more. FREE 30-Day Trial. www.slickedit.com/sourceforge _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
