Hi Lukasz, We use the *chain *interceptor and action in 3 of our applications.
Some example in our struts.xml files include: <interceptor-ref name="chain"/> <action name="index"> <result type="chain"> <param name="actionName">show</param> </result></action> <result name="previous" type="chain"> <param name="actionName">profileApplicationSkillsInit</param></result> Please let me know what the plan is in advance so we can act accordingly. Thank you, Davo On Sun, Oct 25, 2026 at 10:07 AM Lukasz Lenart <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > We are considering deprecating action chaining and removing it in a > future major release. This covers the "chain" result type > (org.apache.struts2.result.ActionChainResult), the "chain" interceptor > (org.apache.struts2.interceptor.ChainingInterceptor) that copies the > previous action's properties onto the next one, and the Unchainable > marker interface. > > Action chaining has been documented as "not recommended" for a long > time. It runs a second action inside the first request with its own > interceptor stack, shares the value stack between the two actions, and > copies action properties by name, which makes the flow of data between > them hard to follow and hard to secure. The alternatives cover the usual > cases: > - the "redirectAction" result (Redirect After Post), which sends the > browser to the next action and keeps each request to one action > - moving the shared logic into a service or a base class that both > actions call directly > - ScopedModelDriven or the session, where state has to survive between > the two steps > > One thing to check if you use the Convention plugin: it chains > implicitly. When an action "foo" returns a result code "bar" and no > result is configured for it, and an action named "foo-bar" exists in the > same package, the plugin builds a chain result to it. You may be relying > on chaining without a <result type="chain"> anywhere in your > configuration. > > Before we decide, we would like to know whether anyone still relies on > action chaining. If you use it, please reply and tell us what you use it > for, especially if the alternatives above would not work for you. > > Thanks in advance! > Lukasz >
