David
From: "Craig R. McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Modules vs. Sub-Applications
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 11:11:17 -0800 (PST)
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, David Graham wrote:
> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 11:24:36 -0700
> From: David Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Modules vs. Sub-Applications
>
> Would it make sense to keep the current names but deprecate and replace them
> in a future version (maybe 2.0)?
To me, deprecating them in 1.1 would imply that we'd really like to remove
them in 1.2 or 1.3 (if there ever was such a thing). And I don't think
that's necessarily what we want to do (although it might).
If we implemented all of the wild ideas I know of already for 2.0 (such as
making the controller a Filter instead of a Servlet), there would likely
be very little similarity between 1.x and 2.x other than the product name.
We're going to have to very carefully hash out what we think the roadmap
should be, before we really have much of an idea on what 2.0 will hold and
therefore what deprecstions it might imply.
>
> David
>
Craig
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
