Re: [Springframework-developer] Petclinic, skeletons, and sample apps

[Lars F. <lar...@gm...>]

I must admit, that I didn't ...
Looked at hibernate, typical, Petclinic and Countries,
maybe I should take a look at the minimal configuration too.

Now let's assume that I use all the configuration stuff like
viewResolver, urlMapping, xxxMethodNameResolver and
even a views.properties file. Is it really necessary to hardcode
the name of the view in the controller ?

If this ist not the case please just tell me because I didn't check if
it is really necessary :-)

Thanks,
Lars




> > One thing I'd like to be improved in Spring (not Petcli
> nic) is the configuration of the MVC part. It seems just 
> too much to configure.
> 
> Have you had a look at the weba
> pp-minimal skeleton? If you rely on the default handler m
> apping and default view resolution, you don't need to def
> ine anything but your controllers. No need for framework 
> beans, no need for views.properties. Just give your contr
> oller beans their URLs as alias names, and return paths t
> o your JSPs as view names. Have a look at example-servlet
> .xml in the samples/skeletons/webapp-minimal/WEB-INF dire
> ctory.
> 
> I agree that there are a lot of configuration o
> ptions in the web framework. I've tried to hard to provid
> e sensible defaults, though.
> 
> Juergen
> 
>