Re: I'm going back to just using regular Actions.. a question

2004-09-17 Thread bmf5
We use option one - separate packages for actions, forms, dao, services, util, etc. Rick Reumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: I'm going back to just using regular Actions.. a question

2004-09-17 Thread Robert Taylor
17, 2004 3:05 PM > To: Struts Users Mailing List > Subject: Re: I'm going back to just using regular Actions.. a question > > > Robert Taylor wrote the following on 9/17/2004 2:58 PM: > > > com.acme.applications.web.foo.account.action > > com.acme.applications.

Re: I'm going back to just using regular Actions.. a question

2004-09-17 Thread Rick Reumann
Robert Taylor wrote the following on 9/17/2004 2:58 PM: com.acme.applications.web.foo.account.action com.acme.applications.web.foo.account.service Yea that was my option 2 I posted. I'm still debating about this one as well. I can see both approaches being decent: com.acme.applications.web.foo.ac

Re: I'm going back to just using regular Actions.. a question

2004-09-17 Thread Frank W. Zammetti (MLists)
Yes, that's exactly what happens. I understand your approach, even like it! :) I think what it comes down to is do you break things up in an object-oriented way or a functional way? It can be argued that done as you say, you are breaking it up based on objects, which mimics how we generally dev

RE: I'm going back to just using regular Actions.. a question

2004-09-17 Thread Robert Taylor
Rick, I have been using the following package layout for a while and it seems to make sense. For example, let's say the foo web application consists of various sub applications like account, store, product download, etc com.acme.applications.web.foo.account.action com.acme.applications.we

Re: I'm going back to just using regular Actions.. a question

2004-09-17 Thread Rick Reumann
Frank W. Zammetti (MLists) wrote the following on 9/17/2004 2:54 PM: I personally use #3. com.company.project | *---actionforms | *---actions | Won't you end up with a TON of Actions though in one package? EmployeeUpdateAction EmployeeDeleteAction EmployeeSearchSetUpAction EmployeeSearchGe

Re: I'm going back to just using regular Actions.. a question

2004-09-17 Thread Frank W. Zammetti (MLists)
Forgot to mention, although you probably guessed... Any other class specific to the app that doesn't fit any of the categories (things like helper classes used in may different Actions) are in com.company.project. -- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http

Re: I'm going back to just using regular Actions.. a question

2004-09-17 Thread Frank W. Zammetti (MLists)
I personally use #3. In fact, all my projects have a pretty internally-standard packaging scheme (my own creation)... com.company.project | *---actionforms | *---actions | *---business | *---config | *---daemonthreads | *---exceptions | *---listeners | *---plugins | *---webservi