DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14054>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14054 Rename "Application" components to "Module" ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2002-10-30 16:06 ------- Why can't you change ActionConfig.setApplicationConfig(ApplicationConfig) to ActionConfig.setApplicationConfig(ModuleConfig) and have it call ActionConfig.setModuleConfig(ModuleConfig)? Because all ApplicationConfig objects are children of ModuleConfig the calls will still work (you can pass ApplicationConfig objects into methods taking ModuleConfig). I haven't looked too much at the code but I still don't see any reason you can't store ModuleConfig objects in the request instead of ApplicationConfig. Once ApplicationConfig is a child of ModuleConfig it doesn't matter which one we put in the request. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
