Eric Webb wrote:
Since moving to web application frameworks (jakarta turbine and ww2)
I've exclusively used velocity. I find velocity's syntax to be simple,
clean, and sufficently powerful for constructing views. I mean, when
you get down to it, a view is simply html (in most cases), and
remigijus wrote:
Ok it sounds nice, I'm not against velocity, I'm just curious.
How many hits you are getting per day and peak load?
What hardware and software do you use?
We do load tests sometimes, but it's hard to compare that with reality.
In reality, we do have one web hotel server which
Erik Jõgi wrote:
Rickard Öberg wrote
...
2) Great performance
3) Templates does not have to be in files (JSP files do)
...
where does the performance win over JSPs come from? As JSPs are compiled
into servlets, how do you beat that?
Don't know, don't care. It's just faster :-) That's probably
Marino wrote:
Is there any news regarding Webwork support for Portlet API.
There is a JIRA issue for that
(http://jira.opensymphony.com/secure/ViewIssue.jspa?key=WW-6)
created on 10/05/2002, but without any progress?
We have a bunch of portlets using WW1 which we are considering porting
to WW2
Jason Carreira wrote:
webwork.configuration.xml.reload=true
In your webwork.properties to tell it to check and automatically reload
XML configuration files (this includes the xwork.xml file and any other
included xwork configuration files, validation.xml files, and type
conversion .properties
Jason Carreira wrote:
I really dislike the option of which syntax to use... Lets choose one and use it...
Definitely agree.
Think about the case where many components/projects using WebWork needs
to be merged into one big app. Oh that won't work because we used
optional method Foo, whereas you
boxed wrote:
Drew McAuliffe wrote:
I agree, and I think that it should be the ${} syntax. The reason I
like the
optional syntax is solely for backwards compatibility.
I don't see why you are using java if you prefer that way of writing
personally.
Let's compare the alternaitves:
ww:property
Hani Suleiman wrote:
WebWork 1.4 has been released, appropriate press blurbage will be
showing up on your regular news channels in the next day or so I
expect. You can grab it from
https://webwork.dev.java.net/files/documents/693/1790/webwork-1.4.zip
Any feedback/testing would be most
Matt Ho wrote:
I've opted to move this to the webwork extensions rather than have it
part of the webwork core. Although the VelocityServlet will be
deprecated, that won't be til Velocity 1.5!
One of the features that's extremely appealing about the velocity tool
project is the ability to
Drew McAuliffe wrote:
That's consistent with numbers I've found in migrating one app from 1.3 to
2.0. I've always held out hope that this was just something that
optimization could take care of. In the meantime, my performance isn't
terrible, but it doesn't fly like it did in 1.3, either. Here's
Francisco Hernandez wrote:
i believe it was suggested that everyone start using the ActionContext
threadlocal to get what previously gotten by the Aware interfaces..
Yup, that was it.
why using ActionContext instead of Aware is another question :)
Because it's easier and less verbose?
/Rickard
Dick Zetterberg wrote:
Removing the interfaces would break many old applications so that should
probably never be done. (Since those are the applications using WW1). So,
since the interfaces will not be removed, then the deprecation might instead
be removed so you don't get the annoying warnings
Jason Carreira wrote:
I've added a section on the WebWork page which lists products using
WebWork
http://wiki.opensymphony.com/space/WebWork
Feel free to add yours...
I've added our CMS/portal/doc mgmt tool SiteVision to the list.
/Rickard
Bernard Choi wrote:
In this particular, our application which uses webwork resides in an
environment along with other applications. That environment is controlled by
another team, who imposes such restrictions.
Ok, but the question then still remains: why impose such restrictions? I
have yet to
Bernard Choi wrote:
This solved the problem, as webwork was now working fine. However,
understandably, granting all permissions is not acceptable in the final
system.
Why not?
/Rickard
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome
Hani Suleiman wrote:
1) I don't see the need to cuss webwork1.
He's not cussing WebWork. He's explaining what is and why it is.
2) The portlet sentence seems rather bizarre to me, a portal
dispatcher? JSR-168 says very little about portals, so a portal
dispatcher is certainly not
all there is to it. Any questions?
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: VM Ware
With VMware you can run multiple operating systems on a single machine
Dick Zetterberg wrote:
Is it not possible to perform this 204 trick just by adding a new standard action that just sets the header and returns NONE? Similar to how the Redirect action works in WW1.x. One would then just chain to this action whenever one wants the header to be set?
Would that
Jason Carreira wrote:
So you don't think there should be a HttpHeaderResult to enable you to return special Http header codes?
That's not what I said. I was talking about the result codes, not view
types.
HttpHeaderResult seems fine to me.
/Rickard
migration/implementation.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best
thread debugger on the planet. Designed with thread
Michael Blake Day wrote:
How do you guys allow customers to modify velocity templates without mucking
with WAR files?
We have portlets which render pieces of pages, and a portlet have a map
(string-object) as configuration. We typically have a template entry
which contains the template to be
Anthony Eden wrote:
Are you trying to allow modifications of Velocity templates stored in an
unexpanded WAR? There is not an easy way to do this as far as I know.
Well, it shouldn't be *that* hard, but it'd be a hassle when you do
upgrades *shiver*
This is not to say it can't be done but
their own customizations without
much trouble.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best
thread debugger on the planet
Hani Suleiman wrote:
Alright, so based on the feedback so far, the consensus seems to be:
webwork jsp UI tags are much slower than velocity equivalents. So the
culprit seems to be the webwork UI tags, not jsp itself.
Well, it's the base JSP include overhead that is bad, really. Including
a JSP
Hani Suleiman wrote:
Most people seem to be in agreement that velocity templates are at least
an order of magnitude faster that jsp pages, which to me seems a
bit...odd. So I was wondering if anyone has good (small) examples of
this being the case. Webwork examples don't count as good examples
Jason Carreira wrote:
Set the button names to all be command and set the value to the name
of a command in your CommandDriven Action and have methods named
doSave,doCancel, etc.
This does not work well with an i18n'ized app, and also doesn't work if
the button name has several words.
It's a
Rob Rudin wrote:
I think one drawback can be that you have to do some extra null-
checking. In the case of a connection, the class probably has a
private instance of Connection, and when it needs to use the
Connection, it might not have a guarantee that the Connection
is not null - i.e. that
Jason Carreira wrote:
Why don't you just go ahead and tell us what you see as drawbacks for
this approach. Obviously if Patrick thought the drawbacks outweighed
the benefits then he wouldn't be endorsing it.
The only thing that is obvious is that the drawbacks Patrick *saw* did
not outweigh the
Jason Carreira wrote:
I started looking at doing this and ran into some snags. For instance,
if the code calling the Proxy wants to get at the Action, how does it do
that? The ActionInvocation won't even have been created yet, if the
Proxy hasn't been executed, and will the Action make sense in a
Jason Carreira wrote:
I was thinking it would be good to let them be able to do a series of
modifications to the programmatic configuration side then commit them
all at once. The runtime configuration is not really a cache, it's
another set of data structures that is built from the first set.
But,
Jason Carreira wrote:
action name=commandTest
class=com.opensymphony.xwork.SimpleAction
param name=foo123/param
result name=error type=chain
param name=actionNamebar/param
/result
interceptor-ref name=static-params/
Jason Carreira wrote:
There are 2 types of parameterization, and you're free to use either
or both. The params in the configuration are static params which are
intended to parameterize a reusable Action for one or more aliases.
For instance, if you had an email action you might parameterize it
Jason Carreira wrote:
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.xmlfoo.xml/param
/application !-- Register subapp bar which uses DB config --
application
Jason Carreira wrote:
We'll have to agree to disagree :-) I think it's useful for some cases.
How about this one: You've got an action you want to alias multiple times with different defaults?
If that ever comes up, I'll answer it. So far I've never come across
such a situation, for me or
Jason Carreira wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Rickard Öberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes, and the right way to do this is probably to enforce that
views have
this style /WEB-INF/foo where foo is the name of the
subapp, i.e. do
a hard prefixing. This will ensure that you can always
Jason Carreira wrote:
* This method in ConfigurationManager is wrong:
Interceptor getInterceptor(String clazz)
It assumes that there is only one instance of each
interceptor class.
This does not account for the case where one instance is used
with many
names (compare with servlets), and
a new one.
I see your points, but I still think there are some details to be
worked out. Check out the code and let me know how you think it
should change.
There's always details to work out :-) I'll check it out.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http
Jason Carreira wrote:
Here's what I'm thinking:
1) Remove the ManageableConfiguration Interface (was
ProgrammableConfiguration) - this is just ConfigurationManager 2)
Make RuntimeConfiguration into a class and move that part of
ConfigurationManager over to it
There will always be only one
Jason Carreira wrote:
How about ManagableConfiguration?
or ConfigurationPackage
or ConfigurationUnit
or ConfigurationBundle
Either works, but maybe ConfigurationBundle best describes what it
actually is.
---
This SF.net email is sponsored
Jason Carreira wrote:
-Original Message- From: Rickard Öberg
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ah, ok, I looked at the interface you sent in email, and true, it
doesn't describe it well. But, I would argue that the interface
should be split, as I described in my first email on programmatic
Cameron Braid wrote:
Rickard,
Is your AOP Framework availible for public use ?
Nope. I built it when we started on the CMS/portal SiteVision that we're
developing, but it has not yet been released for public use yet.
Ironically, we're actually having a little trouble seeing what benefits
it
Jason Carreira wrote:
Undying praise and gratitude? :-)
I tried that one, but my co-workers didn't fall for it :-) They just saw
the enourmous mountain of support email I'd have to deal with - less
time for actual work.
/Rickard
---
This
Patrick Lightbody wrote:
Yup, I personally like SnipSnap, but it's got a lot of missing features that
make it just not good enough. Mainly:
1) Email notifications
2) Revision history
3) File attachments
Agree with these.
4) WikiNaming support (I hate doing [Foo Bar], I like FooBar)
But certainly
Steve Conover wrote:
Would it be possible to make the view selection algorithm pluggable, as
a Strategy or something like that? Just a thought.
It could be, but it would have to account for allowing multiple
algorithms to be present. If a webapp A is composed of webapps B and C,
both of
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
methods, as he
described.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http
of doing it still works.
As I noted the default would be that it works exactly like today.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise
Velocity for about 90%, and JSP for the rest. The
10% JSP are usually forms, since the form tags are not available in
Velocity yet.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET
request stuff.
The ActionInvocation is one thing, the context is different. There are
*some* stuff that is in between, but not much.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET
Andrew Lombardi wrote:
Rickard,
I've upgraded the version of Tomcat to the latest 4.1.18 and I'm no
longer getting the security permissions errors. However, the URI
*.action is still not being mapped and I continue seeing this in the log
files:
WARN [DefaultConfiguration] Skipping XML
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
(for example).
The ideas are similar though.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2
they can't/shouldn't be
merged.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http
that does stuff in actions, and in
that case you'd never have any problem.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM
.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
/ServletContextListener.html
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http
was initialized with HttpSession data if there
is
HttpSession around?
I think ServletActionContext.getSession() works.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email
, or unspecified.
Again, if you just run an action access to the context is not a problem.
If you try to access the context in any other scenario, you're asking
for trouble.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
I'll bite. Just this once.
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
Absolutely, go read it.
I think you should go read it too, Rickard. Your comments here do not
seem to be based on any grasp of what really happened.
Just re-read it, and it re-confirmed my assesment of what happened, and
my comments still
Still off-topic.
Rickard Öberg wrote:
hge snip
Goodbye Jonathan.
Jonathan is bashing on me off-line. Has anyone read the Velocity thread
and found my characterization of it as disgusting to be way out of
line and bordering on harassment of Jonathan?
He sez:
And you had no fucking
join OS.
IMHO.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
that FreeMarker was the ultimate solution and that he
was entitled to telling everyone of this regardless of everyone on the
list begging for the opposite. It was (to me) quite disgusting.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
with that.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
'ranting' is accurate. That's pretty
reasonable, huh?
Sure enough.
And ironically, your post is an excellent example of the kind of stuff I
want to avoid in OpenSymphony.
Now back to our regular programming.
regards,
Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do
Patrick Lightbody wrote:
I found a possible way around this, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea or
not :)
What if the FilterDispatcher never actually makes a call to
filterChain.doFilter()? This would get around the duplicate view request
problem outlined below, but would require that the
performance may be a more important
factor though, so go ahead and change it if you want to. Just make sure
that all calls to the conf. does proper null checking.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
Patrick Lightbody wrote:
snippetysnap
What do you think? Rickard, would this work for you? Everyone else, would
this work for YOU? ;)
Works for me! :-)
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
).
Sometimes flexibility is good, sometimes it's a recipe for disaster. In
this particular case I'd say it's the latter.
Either make OGNL work ok, or go with 1). I'd personally prefer 1).
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
if you, like us,
use includes EVERYWHERE).
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See
Sounds good to me!
/Rickard
Jason Carreira wrote:
Here's a first pass at mission statements for Xwork 1.0 and Webwork 2.0.
Hopefully this will help clear up what Xwork is, what Webwork is, and
what is and is not in scope for each project.
snip
Patrick Lightbody wrote:
I believe that rewriting it to work for Lists would be just fine. The main
thing it is doing is essentially _skipping_ all the EL stuff, which I
believe is OK since templates are only usually edited once.
Another thing that could be an idea is to use Velocity for the
boxed wrote:
I proposed the ability to associate URL's with actions. When the URL is
requested the action is executed and the association is removed. This
removes the need for any Javascript solution or any hidden fields or any
such tricks.
Would the result of this execution be stored so that
Erik Beeson wrote:
There would be no hidden field. When the URL is generated that URL is
associated with the actions to be run. There's no way to figure out from
the URL what actions will be executed.
So you get URLs like:
Joseph Ottinger wrote:
I'd prefer adding it to the wiki or the current release of WW, since there
are some users who actually use what's there now as opposed to vapourware,
even though the vapourware is promising.
Didn't you resign from OpenSymphony? Or was it just that you stopped
doing
Jason Carreira wrote:
I remember Rickard was talking about something to prevent 2 submits, but
I'm not sure what it was...
I proposed the ability to associate URL's with actions. When the URL is
requested the action is executed and the association is removed. This
removes the need for any
with
ThreadLocal (with JNDI?)?
If the threading is done by XWork it would be equally simple.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge
that will only hurt the end result. The question
then becomes: would it be useful to do *both* XWork and WebWork, but as
separate projects with these different goals?
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
kind of
dispatcher?
*) How many are using WebWork in Swing apps?
*) How many are using WebWork for RPC style stuff? (the
ClientServletDispatcher and friends)
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
Patrick Lightbody wrote:
ThreadLocal implies that you always have a single thread throughout the
lifecycle of the action (prepare, execute, print results). This is true for
a servlet container (single thread/request), but not so in other areas.
No, it doesn't imply that. If the execution chain
servlet parameters to
the action. Pretty straightforward. Note that the ActionInvocation is a
temporary object, i.e. it contains request-specific information in
addition to the static interceptor chain.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
Hani Suleiman wrote:
Sure, however, please do keep in mind that many people do choose to use EJB's
for the tx stuff. Session beans really are great for that kind of thing. I
realise that you and others have much against EJBs, and that's fair enough, but
I was just voicing the sentiment that I
Typo.
Rickard Öberg wrote:
When configuring actions you don't typically specify individual actions,
...individual interceptors,
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See
Joseph Ottinger wrote:
He was probably offended by all the horrible negativity aimed at him on
#java.
What was said about him on #java?
/Rickard
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld =
;
- nested throwable: (java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
org/apache/commons/logging/LogFactory)
Add Commons Logging from Jakarta.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This SF.NET
-convert all of the values. etc., etc.
That's certainly possible, and would remove some of the overhead.
The other issues still remain.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
.
Not following. What in the skinning examples is triggering functionality
based on URL-matching?
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome
, as opposed to the declarative security through
web.xml option which only works for the web case.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome
-in prompt, or one could
simply have a view mapped to LOGIN that returns those headers. Or am I
missing something?
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This sf.net email is sponsored
the view mappings in the xwork-web.xml
is because you might want to use the same set of actions for web and
Swing based apps, and you'd want to have different view mappings.
Interesting point. How many people would use it though? How realistic is
that?
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED
is invoked through an include
and is not allowed access to. This is by far the most common case I have
anyway (I don't have ANY other case). How would that work?
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
the path's optional then. Ok, that could work.
PS IMHO the principle of least surprise here is that actions are NOT
available anywhere.
Maybe, maybe not.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
Mike Cannon-Brookes wrote:
Hrm - no, this is thinking the wrong way mate :)
If webwork defined paths, security would work perfectly right?
So why not have webwork only 'work' if the path is correct (and defined)?
Ie /admin/foo.action would execute foo, but /bar/admin/foo.action would
execute
Matt Ho wrote:
I look at it this way. There are a couple accepted ways of implementing
declarative security:
1. Securing based on path (Servlets for example)
2. Securing based on authenticated role (EJBs for example)
There are of course proprietary implementations. Ideally, I would love
for configuration purpose ) and
runtime parameter ( usually use input ).
That would work just fine. You could do this in the prepare() step.
Making a baseclass that has an implementation that does
BeanUtil.copy(Map, this); would do the trick.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I
Jason Carreira wrote:
As opposed to what? This is a model-2 MVC framework. It uses a controller servlet as its entry point.
Using a controller servlet that intercepts all requests but only deals
with some of the requests is going to be unnecessary overhead.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
___
Opensymphony-webwork
matt baldree wrote:
Personally, I like these ideas. I think this design would lead people to
cleaner solutions. I think it is time to make some decisions. I think
Rickard should architect XWork. It would then be up to him to
assign/delegate work on different modules, etc. I'm not convinced the
Mike Cannon-Brookes wrote:
Copmments:
- interceptor-ref name= is ugly XML! Why not just interceptor ref= /
? It's obvious that the name= attribute refers to the name of an
interceptor from the tag name
Because you'd then mix referring to an interceptor and defining one.
Take a look again. If
the
request parameters directly.
Ok, I see.
/Rickard
--
Rickard Öberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senselogic
Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
1 - 100 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
