Craig R. McClanahan wrote: >There's sharing and then there's sharing :-). > >Sharing *data* in application scope and session scope is a reasonable >thing to have - the fact that it's all in the same webapp is sort of a >poor man's "single sign on" plus not having to copy your JAR files into >things like "$CATALINA_HOME/common/lib" in Tomcat. > I honestly hadn't looked at it that way. You're being quite literal with your interpretation of sub-apps being "another context". I wasn't aware that it was meant to be taken quite so literally.
<mega-snip/> >All of these are interesting ideas, but to me I think it's post-1.1 >thinking. Because any of them will likely break backwards compatibility >(and because changes this major will only delay 1.1 further), I'd rather >not focus on implementing them now. OK? > I'll just plod along patching what I can then - and see if I can help hurry 1.1. Then perhaps we can sit down and examine this a bit more seriously. I honestly have no desire to delay a release. I know there is useful functionality in 1.1 as it stands - and there are some folks that "can't" (won't) use it til it's out of beta. I'm sure these are the folks you have in mind (and rightfully so). >Fundamentally, your proposals change an individual struts-config.xml from >being a self contained description of a module to a *partial* description >of a module that cannot be installed and run by itself. Personally, I'd >rather spend a couple of hundred extra bucks for a few more megabytes of >memory than to suffer the complexity costs of this. > Actually - they would only be unable to be run on their own if they were designed to be dependent. >I imagine Martin will like this a lot :-). > That still bugs me :-) Have I commited a terrible sin? Peace :-) I may have a mind to poke a stick in things and stir them up, but I only do so in hopes something constructive will result. -- Eddie Bush -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
