Ted Husted wrote:
> So, now that 1.0.1 is in the queue, we may want to make some decisions
> regarding 1.1.
>
> ...
>
> [Tiles,Validator]
>
> The next question is whether David and Cedric are interested in
> proposing their components to Taglibs or the Commons, or would prefer to
> leave them here. Your call, guys. I believe that you have both indicated
> an interest in broadening the audience for this components, so I say go
> for it. Of course, we would add both to the Users Guide, and may even
> end up requiring the JARs as we do for the Commons components.
I will propose Tiles to taglibs, but, as already said, I would like to let in
Struts an example combining Struts and Tiles. This example will replace actual
example/distribution.
I am in the process of finalizing a new version, with the example.
>
>
> [JARs]
>
> How do people feel about making the rest of the Struts JARs more
> granular? Maybe we should be breaking this up so each package or taglib
> gets its own JAR, so we could have
>
> struts-action.jar
> struts-actions.jar
> struts-html.jar
> struts-logic.jar
> struts-bean.jar
> struts-template.jar
> struts-upload.jar
> struts-util.jar
>
> I think the general trend is toward finely-grained JARs. Down the road,
> I could envision people using the struts-action.jar, but not needing any
> (or all of) the taglibs.
>
We should find the right boundary between too big or too small jar files ...
If there is too much jar files, people won't remind from where a functionality
comes, or what are jar dependencies. As a result, they will use systematically
all jar files ...
Cedric
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
