Sort of, but it's not used that way.
In what way is it not used as a cache?
E.g.: <xwork> <!-- Register subapp "foo" which uses XML config --> <application name="foo"> <param name="config.xml">foo.xml</param> </application> <!-- Register subapp "bar" which uses DB config --> <application name="bar"> <param name="config.db">java:/BarDS</param> </application> </xwork>
What happened to the idea of breaking up the config file with an entity resolver? Then you could have
&package1 &package2
This could be another way of breaking up the config file. But I agree it would be good to be able to have different configuration provider types and have them pulled together into one app.
You're assuming that they're all configured with XML. The example I gave showed how the subapps were registered using XML, but their configuration could be loaded from whatever.
Now, there's another approach to that (as I think I have mentioned before). We could say that the ONLY way to configure XWork is through XML. But, it would be entirely possible to have an entity resolver that creates XML from another configuration format or source. That way we'd need pluggable entity resolvers instead of pluggable configuration providers.
Not sure which approach is best though. Any thoughts on that?
/Rickard
------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
