Re: Two quickies about configuration property names

2011-12-12 Thread Dave Newton
Not sure; can't tell by looking at the API docs. Probably, though. Ultimately I'd like the property config names to be a path to a config object/property--some may already be, I haven't really started looking at those bits. I'd like the ability to define everything hierarchically, in one place,

Re: Two quickies about configuration property names

2011-12-12 Thread Ɓukasz Lenart
2011/12/11 Dave Newton : > I'm fine with that; there is already a provider interface in > XWork--not sure where the property file config comes from, haven't dug > in. DefaultPropertiesProvider and LegacyPropertiesConfigurationProvider ;-) > A property file wouldn't work really well as a struts.xm

Re: Two quickies about configuration property names

2011-12-11 Thread Dave Newton
I'm fine with that; there is already a provider interface in XWork--not sure where the property file config comes from, haven't dug in. A property file wouldn't work really well as a struts.xml replacement. I guess I just don't see the value in a properties file at this point. I was planning on d

Re: Two quickies about configuration property names

2011-12-11 Thread Chris Pratt
I wonder if making configuration pluggable would make sense. Then we could provide XML and Properties configuration plugins and others could add Database backed or Groovy configuration plugins if desired. (*Chris *) On Dec 11, 2011 10:20 AM, "Dave Newton" wrote: > On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:17

Re: Two quickies about configuration property names

2011-12-11 Thread Maurizio Cucchiara
> We recommend XML configuration, and having multiple configuration > points is confusing. I just don't see the point. OK, it was just for the sake of curiosity. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org For addi

Re: Two quickies about configuration property names

2011-12-11 Thread Dave Newton
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Maurizio Cucchiara wrote: >> 1) Can we drop the `.properties` config and move to XML exclusively? > > Could you delve deeper into the matter? Personally I have not ever > used properties stuff, but it is my personal taste (though I see very > few people use it), I

Re: Two quickies about configuration property names

2011-12-11 Thread Maurizio Cucchiara
> I lost the wiki page where we were discussing things; can someone > repost that link? Sure, https://cwiki.apache.org/WW/struts3planning.html - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org For additional commands, e-

Re: Two quickies about configuration property names

2011-12-11 Thread Maurizio Cucchiara
> 1) Can we drop the `.properties` config and move to XML exclusively? Could you delve deeper into the matter? Personally I have not ever used properties stuff, but it is my personal taste (though I see very few people use it), I would like to understand why properties file are a good candidate to

Re: Two quickies about configuration property names

2011-12-11 Thread Dave Newton
I lost the wiki page where we were discussing things; can someone repost that link? How about things marked deprecated, like the old filter, some methods, etc? I'm also wondering if the .ng filters should be moved into a non-.ng-package? If the old ones are deprecated and removed, why differentia

Re: Two quickies about configuration property names

2011-12-10 Thread Johannes Geppert
+1 Thats a good point for the next Major release. Johannes - web: http://www.jgeppert.com twitter: http://twitter.com/jogep -- View this message in context: http://struts.1045723.n5.nabble.com/Two-quickies-about-configuration-property-names-tp5063501p5064102.html Sent from the Struts - Dev