Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-struts-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 72376 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2009 23:54:02 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 9 Dec 2009 23:54:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 27658 invoked by uid 500); 9 Dec 2009 23:54:01 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-struts-dev-archive@struts.apache.org Received: (qmail 27605 invoked by uid 500); 9 Dec 2009 23:54:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@struts.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Struts Developers List" Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@struts.apache.org Received: (qmail 27595 invoked by uid 99); 9 Dec 2009 23:54:01 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Dec 2009 23:54:01 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of brian@pontarelli.com designates 209.85.211.181 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.211.181] (HELO mail-yw0-f181.google.com) (209.85.211.181) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Dec 2009 23:53:51 +0000 Received: by ywh11 with SMTP id 11so2952558ywh.9 for ; Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:53:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.150.246.36 with SMTP id t36mr17625055ybh.120.1260402810863; Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:53:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from e791.p.akamaiedge.net (75-166-202-232.hlrn.qwest.net [75.166.202.232]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 9sm147901ywf.20.2009.12.09.15.53.28 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:53:29 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Subject: Re: struts 2.2 and guice From: Brian Pontarelli In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 16:53:27 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <32B9D6EF-266C-400F-8A6E-E463D4F04C6D@pontarelli.com> References: <17972874-AF2F-4703-84F6-F531FECCEFB4@pontarelli.com> <4B1D605B.8030307@it-neering.net> <436d9a250912071455l2822ae17i2af747b08b1664cb@mail.gmail.com> To: "Struts Developers List" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Dec 9, 2009, at 2:47 PM, Wes Wannemacher wrote: > Don, >=20 > I started another thread to talk about the API issue, but for this I > want to give you my take. The "Managed Beans" JSR I started reading > the other day does offer a few useful features that we don't have. One > is the "conversation" scope, which I think Struts 2 could really > benefit from. That's usually the first thing I have to hear from > WebWork / Struts 2 users - "Everything is tied to either the request > or the session, I can't build wizard-style views" I've always wondered about these things. I tend to use the request and = page storage just because it seems simple and provides we with back = button protections cheaply. I've wondered how complex they are to = implement server side and the benefits of doing it on the server. The = obvious one is security. Are there any others? >=20 > Another benefit is that our current DI is limiting... In every case > that I've used the Container directly, it was because I wanted to pick > one instance out of a few possible implementation candidates. It's > sort of silly that you have to grab the Container to say - "give me > the implementation of interface X called 'foo'" Guice and the JSR have a number of things to help with this now. -bp= --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org