"Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote: [...] > >> Comments? > > > > I see your concern but personally I am not really much worried that > > dependencies > > will become a serious problem. Tools that depend on each other should be in > > the > > same group (package). Groups shoundn't be too fine-grained. Common tool sets > > can > > be taken care of with special build targets. > > > > Considering all this, I think my favourite structure would be: > > > > jakarta-velocity-tools/ > > view > > tools/ > > struts > > math > > form > > table > > ..... > > > > Not very nice is the tools/tools part. Can't think of any better solution > > right now.... > > I don't think that's so bad. Lets keep struts out for now, but document the > tools the same exact way - so then it keeps some visibility right now at the > top, and if I am wrong, it's easy to fold in as we kept the same doc > approach. > > How's that?
That's ok. [...] > > Yes, /view is special. /struts is just a toolset. That really is one of > > the cool things about this Struts integration. We don't do any special > > hacks, tweaks or work arounds. > > Yes - *technically* it's just a toolset. > > But for a user coming over from JSP-based Struts-land, it has to be a > complete 'experience'. Yes, I agree. But the layout of our dev environment or class hierarchive doesn't make the 'experience'. :-) In fact, they should never have to look at this class hierarchy. Anyway, it's a minor issue. I'll proceed in the direction you proposed. Gabe -- Gabriel Sidler Software Engineer, Eivycom GmbH, Zurich, Switzerland -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
