I think it would be nice if the service manager was moved to proper. I was going to use it and move away from the ValidatorServlet, but I needed to use the Tiles extension of ActionServlet so I left the Validator loading alone. If the service manager was built in, then this wouldn't have been necessary. Plus it will be easier to get people to make contributions/packages that use it instead of extending the ActionServlet if it is in the core (hopefully :) ).
David --- Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree that it would have been better to have given > Craig time to > respond and explain why he "wasn't ready for that". > > But as of yet no one has given an actual reason why > we should put it > under acontrib. Ultimately the extension belongs > with the other taglibs. > It's been "out there" already, has had it share of > downloads, and I'm > unaware of any negative comments. As we move toward > 1.1, it's important > that we get things like this into the frontline of > the nightly build, so > they can undergo even more use testing. > > We had some things like this in contrib before -- > but because we weren't > sure if they should *ever* go into the core. So far, > the Validator has > been moved to the Commons and Cedric and I are > getting ready to propose > Tiles to Taglibs. Though, Oleg's system manager > should be moved over > when he's ready. Scaffolding are things that I feel > are too "stylistic" > for the core. Artimus is an example app that isn't > ready for prime time > yet. > > If the nesting extension were something that had not > already been fully > developed and testing, then, sure, we can use the > contrib as a sandbox. > But this taglib has been in circulation for some > time, and has had > ardent support on the Dev list. > > So, moving forward, I would like to have discussion > of why we would put > something like this in contrib in the first place. > > -Ted. > > > Martin Cooper wrote: > > > > I have to say that I'm disappointed to see this > committed at this time. > > Craig specifically suggested that this code start > out in 'contrib', but that > > request was not honoured. I happened to agree with > that suggestion, but did > > not feel that I needed to say so, since I assumed > that one dissenting > > comment, especially from Craig, was sufficient to > indicate that the proposal > > needed more thought and/or experimentation. > > > > Certainly, any committer can make changes at any > time. However, as Ted > > mentioned, "If you believe someone might have a > contrary opinon, it's > > helpful to ask first and proactively resolve any > > vetos." Personally, I feel that Craig's comments > should have been addressed > > and resolved before any commit was made. I > consider ignoring such comments > > to be "bad form". > > > > I'm not going to -1 these changes, because I think > the nesting taglibs are a > > useful extension to Struts. However, I'd really > like to see us work as a > > team, in the future, rather than as a group of > individuals. > > > > -- > > Martin Cooper > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Arron Bates" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Struts Developers List" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 12:28 AM > > Subject: Nested Extension - Committed > > > > > Well... there it is. > > > > > > - Recreated package.html to be more consistent > with the rest of them, > > > provide better developer docco etc. > > > > > > - To get things done, simply created the tld > struts-nested.xml file of > > > the others, keeping the docco. There's been all > this mention of slowing > > > things down in regards to the tags to see what > the spec's going to end > > > up with, so there'll be time to refine this if > people feel it's > > > warranted. I think something should be done, but > this will give time to > > > decide the colour of the bike shed. > > > > > > One idea I had was to put all the tags from the > three libraries into one > > > xml file, then run the stylesheet for each > taglib, and that way the > > > stylesheet can pick its tags and if a library > nees something specific > > > from any of them (or extends them), it can have > it's own stylesheet > > > (this could also be handy for other developers > to automate the building > > > of their Struts extensions). Naturally this > could also be carried into > > > docco. Say a page is needed where we want a list > of all tags, we can > > > simply make another stylesheet. I think you get > what I'm driving at. > > > > > > Do the taglic.xml files' process do anthything > more than just the html > > > pages and the tld's?... if that's it I can spend > a little time on making > > > it happen if people think it's a good thing. > > > > > > - It built perfectly. And tested out through all > my tests the same, > > > hence the commit. > > > > > > - I haven't updated any of the site's links to > include it as I figure > > > that this is only done on a release basis (the > api-1.0 docco etc). > > > correct?... > > > > > > - Also cleaned up the main Struts logo (a > clean-up was all that was > > > done. I didn't make it rotate or anything :). > > > It's just that 100% black drop shadow was > driving me batty :) > > > (the download is actually smaller too!) > > > > > > > > > Arron. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
