On Monday, March 3, 2003, at 04:39 PM, Nathan Bubna wrote:
Bill said: ...-1 for the way you've proposed it.
What I am in favor of, is keeping the current or similar package
structure with tools (generic non servlet), view (servlet specific) and
struts. One of my reasons for posting a list of possible tools is to
show that there is or will be a need for a generic tools package so it
shouldn't be removed.
My (latest version of the) proposal was *not* to eliminate a generic tools
package, but to merely fold the directory trees together. There would then
be a org.apache.velocity.tools.generic.* package to replace the excised and
ill-named org.apache.velocity.tools.tools.* package.
That's not so bad. It's just a renaming? I'd easily retract the -1 if just a renaming. I never liked tools.tools either.
BUT, that doesn't need to imply multiple jars are required for
deployment. The build.xml could still build three jars but the view jar
would also include tools; struts jar would include both view and tools.
The tools jar would just be generic tools. So no matter what your
use, there's still only one jar to deploy. It should be rather easy to
fix the build.xml to do this.
True, this deployment scheme (which sounds great) can (and, barring strenous
objection, will) be implemented with either the current three-tree structure
or the single-tree structure i propose. Given this assurance, would you
agree that the single-tree structure is more efficient and easier to
maintain (esp. when traversing file paths)?
?
Nathan Bubna [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
