Re: [Webwork-devel] RE: Refactorings... Again

[Maurice P. <Ma...@Vi...>]

Hey,

Victor has some very valid points.  I in no way got the impression from 
the mailings on this list that the package structure of WebWork was going 
to be changed by your refactorings.  My impression was that you would 
modify the build process to distribute cleanly on more app servers and fix 
the examples.  Everyone subclasses off of ActionSupport, so you have 
broken a lot of code people have out there by moving it.  For this reason 
alone I would have strongly disagreed with the package restructuring.

On Friday, March 1, 2002, at 07:00  AM, Matt Baldree wrote:
>
> Goals?
> 1. I think we need to remove examples and test from mainline of code.
> 2. I think we should better delineate/separate the view support.
> 3. I think we need a distribution that will ensure WW will deploy on all
> Servlet 2.3 and JSP 1.2 containers and remove the release coupling of 
> views.
> 4. Release 1.0.

Number 4 on your list is what's important.  All the other stuff you list 
could have been goals for 2.0.  Victor has been holding back big changes 
he would like to make so as not to destablize the current tree.  I don't 
see any reason we shouldn't do the same with your goals.

> Here are my thoughts on above.
>
> Since we have not released a 1.0 I think there is some license to refactor
> packages a little more than if 1.0 was already released. The refactoring

Not true.  Some of us were trying to keep the current code stable to make 
the 1.0 release.  If we ever actually released 1.0 we could then begin 
work on 2.0 during which your goals of separating the Action engine from 
the view technologies could be done.
>
> Here are my opinions what is yours.

My opinion is that we have lost sight of what this projects original goals 
where.  WebWork is supposed to be easy to use.  Giving the users a 
multitude of deployment options just makes things more complicated than 
they need to be.  Quite simply I am unconvinced that Velocity, the Taglibs,
  and XSLT being deployed with the Action engine has ever caused problems 
for the end user.

My advice is that we roll back the recent changes to package structure, 
fix the examples, make sure it deploys on Tomcat, and then release WebWork 
1.0.

-Maurice


> -Matt
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kjetil Paulsen" <kje...@mo...>
> To: "Victor Salaman" <vsa...@ho...>;
> <web...@li...>
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 4:53 AM
> Subject: RE: [Webwork-devel] RE: Refactorings... Again
>
>
>
>> In my mind I just can't picture what the names mean....
>> common == common to
>> all components, but core == needed by all components ...
>
> common are common stuff to webwork :)
> like most of the time you would use one or more of these view technologies
> togheter with WW, and also some or all of the classes in the other common
> packages
>
>> So therefore at this
>> point I can't
>> really tell you where to put it, all I can say is that all
>> the configuration
>> functionallity should be together. either all in common or
>> all in core.
>
> my reason for putting it common was that XML confiurator uses 3rd party 
> xml
> libraries but I think maybe it should be all in core ..
>
> Matt, what do you say?
>
>>
>>> And also the property files, we introduced
>> common.properties, not completly
>>> sure yet what goes in here from default.props
>>>
>>
>> hehe, it's your doing, you figure it out... haha
>
> will do ....
>
>
>>
>> .... maybe it's time for me to branch the codebase to another
>> project, and
>> go back to basics, after all this is open source, and ww has
>> a liberal
>> license.... maybe I'm just getting old... heck, who knows. hehe
>
> up to you.. don't see why these changes would make you do that - the
> functionality is the same it's just layed out in another way
>
> /kjetilhp
>
> _______________________________________________
> Webwork-devel mailing list
> Web...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webwork-devel
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Webwork-devel mailing list
> Web...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webwork-devel
>