struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Noël Ribette <>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL - specialized taglib for fast interface development]
Date Wed, 14 Mar 2001 19:21:25 GMT

----- Original Message -----
From: Craig R. McClanahan <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL - specialized taglib for fast interface development]

>On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, [iso-8859-1] Jean-Noël Ribette wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I have been working with Struts for one month now, and I think Struts is a
>> great framework. My company is going to use and support it. Otherwise, there
>> are a view features I would like to see in Struts or as an extension. Here
>> is a proposal for a special library to increase interfaces development
>> speed. More information can be found at
>Jean-Noel, I've finally had a chance to take a look at this (back from two
>weeks on the road), and it looks very interesting to me.  I could forsee a
>new tag library called "struts-layout.html" (or something like that) that
>contains tags like this, so that all Struts users could take advantage of
>the work you've started on, in conjunction with or instead of the lower
>level "struts-html" tags as appropriate.

I thank you for the interest you show to my proposal, and I would be pleased to work on this
idea for Struts.

>If you would be interested, I'd like to add a TODO list item for Struts
>1.1 for a layout library, and put your name down as a volunteer to work on
That's OK with me.

>  If you'd like to become actively involved, we can talk about
>proposing you as a committer on the project (according to the guidelines
>on the Jakarta web site at <>).  Otherwise, I can
>commit the code to the CVS repository for you.
Being involved in Struts is something I'd like to, and I would be very grateful to become
a committer on a
"struts-layout" part.

>As soon as we create a beta 2 of Struts 1.0, I'm going to branch the CVS
>repository so that we can start checking in changes for 1.1.  Therefore,
>your timing is quite appropriate.
>Craig McClanahan


View raw message