Re: [Springframework-developer] 1.0 M3 prepared

[Colin S. <col...@ex...>]

jürgen höller [werk3AT] wrote:

>Everybody,
> 
>I've just prepared the release as far as possible: fixed all javadoc errors, added missing package javadocs, tested the samples. All tests for shipped components pass on my machine (when running via Ant).
> 
>The TLD is now loaded from the spring.jar file, referenced via the default URI http://www.springframework.org/tags (analogous to Struts and JSTL). BaseCommandController uses setCommandName now, with setBeanName being deprecated.
> 
>Whoever wants to give it a try, fetch the latest CVS contents, run the release target, and "play user" with spring-framework-1.0-m3.zip (it's in the target/release directrory): unzip it, browse through the docs, build the sample wars (call ant warfile or warfile.bat) and drop them into your container's webapps directory.
> 
>Alef, could you give the tiles-example a final try? I'm not keen on including struts.jar in the Spring distribution, so the example should be prepared for deployment with a manually added struts.jar.
> 
>A final note on a further naming issue: I'm not entirely happy with "ListableBeanFactoryImpl". For example, BeanWrapperImpl is *the* implementation of BeanWrapper, hardly any chance for alternative implementations - the interface is rather a simplified API for it. But ListableBeanFactoryImpl implements ConfigurableListableBeanFactory with registration methods for a specific properties format; this seems to be a different case to me.
> 
>So wouldn't it be more appropriate to call it "DefaultListableBeanFactory"? That name change should not affect typical applications anyway but just "power users" who should be willing to migrate via a simple class name change. I quite strongly prefer this name to "ListableBeanFactoryImpl", actually. If we agree on the new name, let's better change it now instead of in the 1.0 RC phase.
> 
>  
>
I am ok with the name change, as it does make sense.

Btw, as per another email, I have added a new MethodCallFactoryBean 
class. It should be totally ok for this release, as no other code was 
touched, and there is a full unit test.

Regards,
Colin