ActionContext could certainly, and probably will be, a subclass of
o.a.c.c.Context but my point is it will not be a subclass of the
ServletWebContext, which struts-chain creates and passes through its
commands.
Don
Vic wrote:
Ah... can someone educate me as to why not just subclass chain
conte
Ah... can someone educate me as to why not just subclass chain context,
would it not let you just do the same thing you said bellow?
(and w/o servlet api).
.V
Don Brown wrote:
The summary of our discussion, as I understand it, would be to create
a ActionContext, which would not be a subclass of
The summary of our discussion, as I understand it, would be to create a
ActionContext, which would not be a subclass of any commons-chain
contexts, but would contain the commons-chain, probably WebContext
instance available via a getter. This would allow us to have one
ActionContext instance,
As one of the Struts developers who is very keen on moving
chain-integration forward, I'll say a few brief words. I'm not on
the commons-user list, but I will say that Sean's right that this
discussion is best suited to struts-dev. (I'll leave commons-user
on this message, but I'd encourage
Pedro,
A StrutsWebContext class might be an interesting idea. If adopted, it
should go in the struts-chain project as opposed to commons-chain. (I
am sending a copy of this response to the struts-dev mailing list
which is probably the best place to propose this kind of enhancement).
I'm not sur
Joe Germuska wrote:
Actually, this solves the 'chaining action' conundrum, because your
command can actually point to a chain, where you compose a series of
logical steps which execute, but which do not each require an
additional pass through the rest of the RequestProcessor chain.
Or just have
Yes I also thought of this idea of a map of custom properties.
Yeah, as I had mentioned in earlier discussion, it's been a pet
feature request from someone on my team, and it makes possible the
ChainAction when you need two config params; the alternative would be
an ActionMapping which implement
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:22:15 +, Pilgrim, Peter wrote:
> I was thinking in truth, only providing access to the ``catalog''
> and ``command'' not necessarily changing the execution model. But
> if that is the case, could a Struts ``Action'' as it appears in
> 1.2.6 actually be a commons chain `Co
Author: germuska
Date: Wed Dec 15 06:25:41 2004
New Revision: 111970
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=111970
Log:
add support for a map of arbitrary properties to ActionConfig, and adjust
ConfigRuleSet to understand the new config.
Modified:
struts/core/trunk/src/share/org/apach
> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Germuska [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
====
>
> Peter:
>
> If you haven't seen it, this is effectively what the ChainAction
> does, or at least what it will be doing soon.
>
>name="LocaleChangeForm"
>
> type="org.apache.co
Author: germuska
Date: Wed Dec 15 08:22:06 2004
New Revision: 111987
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=111987
Log:
create "-//Apache Software Foundation//DTD Struts Configuration 1.3//EN" and
add it as a registered DTD in ActionServlet
Added:
struts/core/trunk/conf/share/struts-c
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:48:52 -0800, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, Martin,
>
> I don't think I said a thing about struts-chain. Why would you think
> I thought something I never mentioned and ignore what I did say?
You replied to a message that asked a question about struts-chain.
Author: germuska
Date: Wed Dec 15 07:22:22 2004
New Revision: 111974
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=111974
Log:
correct error using 'name' attr instead of 'property' for action/set-property;
update javadoc to reflect simpler implementation than originally planned
Modified:
str
At 7:38 AM -0600 12/15/04, Joe Germuska wrote:
I've got the code written to support arbitrary properties (the new
'key' attribute in set-property), but just ran out of time to write
a mini Struts App to demonstrate that it actually works.
OK, I felt lame writing the above since I've been sitting
Peter:
If you haven't seen it, this is effectively what the ChainAction
does, or at least what it will be doing soon.
name="LocaleChangeForm"
type="org.apache.commons.chain.mailreader.struts.CommandActionSubclassingChainAction"
>
Hello
I have read the Commons Chain Cookbook.
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/chain/cookbook.html
Regarding the receipe, "Call a Command from Struts", it seems to me that
Struts
could support the Command more directly in the ActionMapping.
Instead of relying on convention, shared database key,
The nice thing about Struts is that we can always experiment with custom
ActionMappings before adjusting the DTD.
I'm sure that once we integrate Chain with Struts, and people start using
Commands in their own applications, there will be several proposals regarding
ways to integrate Struts with
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:20:08 -0800, Dakota Jack wrote:
> How is JSF not OT with struts-dev or struts-user? Struts is not
> dead yet, is it? And, if not, why is struts airtime free to JSF?
Integration with JSF has been on the Struts roadmap for at least a year. We
have a Struts-JSF taglib that i
Or, another quote from BaTien which notably leaves out STRUTS:
"4) If we want to combine Jsf as view controller, Spring IoC and
commons-chain CoR, a practical infrastructure may be something like
followings:
a) Jsf as a view controller takes care of objects directly related
to User Interface (U
Hi, Martin,
One last tidbit, if you still cannot see what I am talking about and
perhaps other things I am not saying that you might think I am saying,
let me show you what the originator of this thread is saying in a
quote:
If I can quote the original, Martin, that is all I have to say on this f
20 matches
Mail list logo
