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: domain of musachy@gmail.com designates
 209.85.216.174 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=EYwFaxJKjykKvt2Lh/5oraxr4hAq7yA5VcZbG/2PM6xGwaEyF3EFXBm8JRl0VnhPKv
         jm6mjEkNK6BEXJNPJEoNcSxFZv2JJ5hfDWylTMoZH0EP+CI695643hN/DgG/AHI3nwza
         FbMk7/HBLM86SO81XZ2KCdCFQHiEr/D+SJOdE=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4A494BBE.7040204@Newfield.org>
References: <d8bdeb6f0906271854wb27383fp4a710887edf85b32@mail.gmail.com>
	 <d8bdeb6f0906271915la54f6e6x805cc85f5df583c0@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4A46D706.8010309@yahoo.com>
	 <d8bdeb6f0906272009r1de26fdfk34613845bdc1469d@mail.gmail.com>
	 <d8bdeb6f0906291212l1979af04ubd90f7dedf8e0143@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4A493335.60705@Newfield.org>
	 <d8bdeb6f0906291449k1a89471fv862c0e3c51e40569@mail.gmail.com>
	 <d8bdeb6f0906291546x72c31a9fr9d62e7cd8d5bbcd9@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4A494BBE.7040204@Newfield.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:14:00 -0800
Message-ID: <d8bdeb6f0906291814u43573c71ye28b02b4055af5bd@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: confused about OGNL
From: Musachy Barroso <musachy@gmail.com>
To: Struts Developers List <dev@struts.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

2.7 has been out for a while, so it should not be *that* risky, but I
wouldn't include it in 2.1.8 with such a short notice and no testing.

musachy

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Dale Newfield<dale@newfield.org> wrote:
> Musachy Barroso wrote:
>>
>> I did some more checking and it looks good. I would say after 2.1.8
>> gets released, we create the 2.1 branch and start working on 2.2,
>> which would use OGNL 2.7, how does that sound?
>
> I'm gonna start using 2.7(.3) now. =A0I think I had reverted from 2.7 to =
2.6
> as a result of this exchange:
> http://www.nabble.com/Slow-performance-with-Struts2-td18092204.html .
>
> I thought we were already updating lots of other dependencies for 2.1.8?
>
> I understand that there might be code changes in struts that would allow =
us
> to benefit from some of the speedups in 2.7 (which would best go into 2.2=
),
> but if it neither breaks anything nor slows anything down with just a jar
> change, any reason to wait? =A0(Your caching issue is one, but adding tha=
t
> doNotCache flag seems like a reasonable workaround for now...)
>
> -Dale
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>


--=20
"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