struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian Pontarelli <br...@pontarelli.com>
Subject Re: Should I announce SmartURLs or wait?
Date Thu, 13 Sep 2007 16:16:36 GMT

Luckily Smart URLs is A2 ;)

I agree that providing a zip is probably better. I think ensuring that 
out of the box things can be configured for maximum simplicity and make 
it easy for developers to get up and running should be the goal. This 
mostly comes down to documentation and not necessarily with bundling. 
Writing up a good document that says, "grab these 5 JARs and put them in 
WEB-INF/lib" seems to be a minimal amount of overhead. The key is to 
provide clear information about the standard plugins and how to get up 
and running using them.

-bp

Ted Husted wrote:
> In our case, we might want to think about a struts-standard.zip or
> struts-bundle.zip that contained the recommended plugins -and- their
> dependencies. So, if we are including the Spring plugin, we would
> include the spring.jar too. This could just be yet another artifact
> that we post, like the struts-lib.zip. We might also setup a Maven
> prototype that did the same thing, or just offer the prototype, a la
> AppFuse.
>
> Of course, this presumes that all of the plugin dependencies  that we
> bundle can be distributed under the Apache license.
>
> -Ted.
>
> On 9/13/07, Paul Benedict <pbenedict@apache.org> wrote:
>   
>> My only caution with a struts2-standard.jar is that the analogy to Spring
>> isn't accurate. Spring doesn't have a plug-in architecture (yet) and
>> including more classes doesn't affecting the running of the libraries. On
>> the contrary, Struts plug-ins are loaded automatically and hook themselves
>> into the framework. So I am -1 on providing a struts with statically-bound
>> bundled plug-ins. A zip file distribution would be preferred.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> On 9/11/07, Don Brown <mrdon@twdata.org> wrote:
>>     
>>> Could you translate these ideas into JIRA tickets and mark them
>>> against 2.1?  After I finish with the XWork refactoring, I'd like to
>>> work on making the configuration providers pluggable, because as you
>>> said, it really opens up some interesting possibilities.  It is kinda
>>> tricky as you have a chicken-egg situation with providers that create
>>> plugins which create providers, so patches would be very welcome :)
>>>
>>> Don
>>>
>>> On 9/12/07, Brian Pontarelli <brian@pontarelli.com> wrote:
>>>       
>>>>  Well, the configuration provider is kinda a pain right now. I started a
>>>> thread a while back about making configuration providers pluggable via
>>>>         
>>> the
>>>       
>>>> struts-plugin.xml file. I think it sorta died  because you can use init
>>>> parameters to setup providers in web.xml.
>>>>
>>>>  In addition, if you want to use the extensionless support as well as
>>>>         
>>> all
>>>       
>>>> the index support of the plugin it requires a completely different
>>>>         
>>> filter,
>>>       
>>>> but it would be much nicer to have everything just plug-in and run with
>>>>         
>>> as
>>>       
>>>> little configuration as possible.
>>>>
>>>>  If we keep it a plugin then I would suggest removing zero-config from
>>>>         
>>> core
>>>       
>>>> so that they don't conflict. I'd probably also want to rework the
>>>> DispatcherFilter to make it more pluggable so that the majority of the
>>>>         
>>> work
>>>       
>>>> is from injections and then it can be changed without modifying the
>>>>         
>>> web.xml.
>>>       
>>>> Lastly, the configuration providers need to be easier to setup. This
>>>>         
>>> would
>>>       
>>>> probably require a more robust configuration mechanism that would
>>>>         
>>> pre-inject
>>>       
>>>> configuration providers and then inject the rest of the container.
>>>>
>>>>  However, all that said, I think this should be in core. The beauty of
>>>> frameworks like Rails and Grails is that they give all the conventions
>>>>         
>>> right
>>>       
>>>> out of the box. I feel like Struts should try to strive to match the
>>>>         
>>> ease of
>>>       
>>>> these other frameworks. Otherwise, it requires the users to actually
>>>>         
>>> know
>>>       
>>>> that the plugin exists, go find it, install it and then learn it all.
>>>>
>>>>  -bp
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Don Brown wrote:
>>>>  The reason the zero config stuff is in core is mainly because it
>>>> requires a configuration provider, which cannot be plugged in via a
>>>> struts plugin. Is there any other technical reason that this should
>>>> be in core?
>>>>
>>>> Don
>>>>
>>>> On 9/11/07, Musachy Barroso <musachy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  IMO this should be a "core" feature of struts 2.
>>>>
>>>> musachy
>>>>
>>>> On 9/10/07, Don Brown <mrdon@twdata.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Hmm...along those lines, could SmartURL be Codebehind 2.0?
>>>>
>>>> As for 2.1, I'm working on a huge patch to xwork 2.1 that will, among
>>>> other things, make OGNL pluggable and fully migrate the code to
>>>> container injection (no statics!). I should be done sometime this
>>>> week.
>>>>
>>>> Don
>>>>
>>>> On 9/11/07, Ted Husted <husted@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Why wait? People using Struts 2.0.x could use it now. Struts 2.1.x
>>>> could be out next week, or next month, or next year. There's really no
>>>> telling.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure what "rolling it into the core" means. If it means
>>>> putting the source into the Struts-Core JAR, then I'd probably be
>>>> opposed. Personally, I'd like to keep rolling things out of the core
>>>> and distribute as much as possible in the form of plugins. Ultimately,
>>>> there should be nothing in the core that doesn't *need* to be in the
>>>> core. My thought would be to include SmartURLs in Struts 2.1.x as the
>>>> successor to the CodeBehind plugin.
>>>>
>>>> -Ted.
>>>>
>>>> On 9/10/07, Musachy Barroso <musachy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  +1 for waiting and rolling it into core, it could be available for 2.1
>>>>
>>>> musachy
>>>>
>>>> On 9/10/07, Brian Pontarelli <brian@pontarelli.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  I was planning on release 1.0 of SmartURLs in the near future and doing
>>>> some announcements to the user lists and some other locations. However,
>>>> should I wait on that if favor of rolling this back into core, or should
>>>> I go ahead?
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> -bp
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  --
>>>> "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>
>
>   


Mime
View raw message