Mailing-List: contact dev-help@struts.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
  h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID;
  b=TyQ/Hf9/E1tmFUL6MJGqy4Iq0H6oB0oX2yAbNeq7WltfCRYGC0AZ99N2ZAGxvCrO/EbhwhZSLa724cPTGDXodwnNu4mgaGdOYoqw6PyuxTkTqx9KVNmvgbAFd1eIs14h7mT7s6fWEPX/9VF/Wdrw+aUAEKT3omXDL3pFroXc8YI=;
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:03:47 -0800 (PST)
From: Dave Newton <newton.dave@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Fileupload dependency,
 https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2446
To: Struts Developers List <dev@struts.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <37e451880801191740j1643f474q1489bee8d1ebd1e0@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <217400.31320.qm@web56712.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

--- James Mitchell <jmitchell@apache.org> wrote:
> (I renamed the subject to attract the attention of any devs who would
> likely have something to say about increasing the size of the distribution,

> but are probably not following this discussion)

Looks the same.

> I could be wrong (it's happened in the past, rarely :) , but that setting
> is not an out-of-the-box configuration.  It is simply a default setting 
> as to which multipart request impl to use.

Meh; "default" means "out-of-the-box" to me.

> If you create a Struts project and you drop in a <s:file> tag so that you
> can have file uploading in your app.  To me this means that you have
> "decided" to use File Upload functionality which (again, to me) is the 
> same as "deciding" to use jasper reports or "deciding" to use the jsf
> plugin.

If file uploading required the conscious decision to use a specific plugin,
I'd agree. But it doesn't, as it stands now. The way things stand now (modulo
your new file upload interceptor comment documentation) there's nothing in
the documentation that implies anything special must be done to support a
common-enough usecase.

> I think the confusion here is because file upload should be pulled into
> it's own plugin.

That's fine, although I still have to agree with Antonio that uploading a
file is common enough that it *should* work out of the the box without
additional dependencies. Pulling it in to a plugin would at least make it
clear that S2 doesn't support file uploading out of the box.

d.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org