You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@struts.apache.org by Tom Schneider <sc...@gmail.com> on 2007/11/04 15:33:16 UTC
[s2] Roadmap for the core taglib
Speaking of the core taglib, what ARE we going to do with it. There's
been talk of moving them to a separate plugin, reimplementing them in a
java, etc. It would be nice to know from a roadmap prespective about
where the core taglib is headed--I have several plugins that would be
affected by it.
At a minimum, if we're going to keep the ftl template at all, then I
would recommend we bring in tabletags. (At least the paging and sorting
tags) Looking at the downloads page for tabletags, there have been over
7000 downloads over the last year. That seems significant to me. The
table tag itself probably needs a little TLC at the moment, but I think
the other tags are pretty solid. I'm also open to looking at other tags
that should be brought in--again this is contingent on what we decide to
do with them pesky tags.
Tom
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [s2] Roadmap for the core taglib
Posted by Don Brown <mr...@twdata.org>.
Even though I argued for it initially, I'm still not 100% sure we want
to pull out the tags. Not only is it more confusing to users, but it
makes tag extension harder, since plugins can't provide plugin points
to other plugins. That means we'd have to keep the majority of the
tag infrastructure in core, which gains us little, IMO.
One reason to pull them out is it better facilitates new EL's. With
how the tags work right now, they depend on the OGNL EL from a syntax
perspective mostly as the API dependency has been abstracted. If you
created a JUEL plugin, for example, you'd probably want to rewrite
most of the tags to better take advantage of deferred expressions.
Anyways, I'm not saying there aren't solutions, just that we need to
think about it some more. At this point, I'm not sure the potential
cost outweights the benefits.
Don
On 11/5/07, Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 2007 9:33 AM, Tom Schneider <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Speaking of the core taglib, what ARE we going to do with it. There's
> > been talk of moving them to a separate plugin, reimplementing them in a
> > java, etc. It would be nice to know from a roadmap prespective about
> > where the core taglib is headed--I have several plugins that would be
> > affected by it.
>
> My understanding is that we would like to move the existing tags to a
> plugin, and create a standard bundle that would include the
> tag-plugin, the code-behind plugin, and the core as a single JAR.
>
> The code-behind plugin will subsume the zero-config and annotations
> code, as well as the SmartURls plugin.
>
> * [s2] Should tags be their own plugin?
> * [S2] Plugins gone wild!
>
> One place to document decisions like this is the STATUS.txt file under SVN.
>
> * http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/struts/current/STATUS.txt?view=markup
>
> In terms of the longer-term roadmap, work is being done on a JSP 2
> taglib that won't use the templating system at all.
>
> Don's also been doing some preliminary refactoring in XWork so that
> the expression language can be made pluggable, meaning we would also
> be able to plugin something else instead of OGNL.
>
> -Ted.
>
> >
> > At a minimum, if we're going to keep the ftl template at all, then I
> > would recommend we bring in tabletags. (At least the paging and sorting
> > tags) Looking at the downloads page for tabletags, there have been over
> > 7000 downloads over the last year. That seems significant to me. The
> > table tag itself probably needs a little TLC at the moment, but I think
> > the other tags are pretty solid. I'm also open to looking at other tags
> > that should be brought in--again this is contingent on what we decide to
> > do with them pesky tags.
> > Tom
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> HTH, Ted <http://www.husted.com/ted/blog/>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [s2] Roadmap for the core taglib
Posted by Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org>.
The key point is that we don't have to demonstrate all the flexibility
in the examples that we post at the site. People who don't know what
choices to make, will look at our examples, and just follow those.
As to the examples we post, I would like to pick a stack that we can
all support, and use it to write "best practices" examples. For
example, I'm not a fan of JSP, but I do agree that we should use JSP,
because that's what everyone understands and can at least maintain.
And, if when we post FreeMarker or Velocity examples, we should label
them as "alternatives". (Even though I personally prefer Velocity.)
And now that we have the JPA, I would also like to use it to power the
MailReader, and other examples, and maybe work on some Eclipse tools
to make it all quite painless. Right now, everyone knows that
JPA/Hibernate, Spring, and Struts/JSP is the defacto industry standard
stack, and that's what we should use in our examples.
As to the rest of it, there's a saying in ASF circles: Let Darwin Decide.
No one here is compelled to support anything. If no one knows the
answer to a question, then the question doesn't get answered.
Likewise, if something doesn't work as well as it might, and no one
submits a patch, it doesn't get maintained. In the end, what gets
supported and maintained will be a function of what each volunteer
chooses to support and maintain.
It's also important to recognize that the flexibility is being born
out of actual need. OGNL is scary, and the templating system is
ongoing source of performance complaints. If we were making decisions
based on support effort, then these are the first two things that
should go.
-Ted.
On Nov 4, 2007 3:02 PM, Tom Schneider <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ted Husted wrote:
> > Don's also been doing some preliminary refactoring in XWork so that
> > the expression language can be made pluggable, meaning we would also
> > be able to plugin something else instead of OGNL.
> >
> > -Ted.
> You mean like JUEL?
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/S2PLUGINS/JUEL+plugin :)
>
> Thanks for the info Ted, that helps me out. So looking down the road we
> might have:
> xml configuration or codebehind;
> new java taglib or current templating taglib;
> freemarker, velocity or JSP;
> OGNL, MVEL, or JUEL.
>
> I'm all for choice, but trying to support all those combinations might
> be challenging. I can just imagine the posts on the user list:
> "Um.. I'm using Struts 2 with the code behind and rest plugin and the
> java taglib in velocity with MVEL and my page doesn't display"
> I'm not saying we shouldn't persue these endeavors, but I think it's
> helpful to consider things from a new user perspective and decide if
> we're going to support every combination of technology.
>
> Tom
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [s2] Roadmap for the core taglib
Posted by Tom Schneider <sc...@gmail.com>.
Ted Husted wrote:
> Don's also been doing some preliminary refactoring in XWork so that
> the expression language can be made pluggable, meaning we would also
> be able to plugin something else instead of OGNL.
>
> -Ted.
You mean like JUEL?
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/S2PLUGINS/JUEL+plugin :)
Thanks for the info Ted, that helps me out. So looking down the road we
might have:
xml configuration or codebehind;
new java taglib or current templating taglib;
freemarker, velocity or JSP;
OGNL, MVEL, or JUEL.
I'm all for choice, but trying to support all those combinations might
be challenging. I can just imagine the posts on the user list:
"Um.. I'm using Struts 2 with the code behind and rest plugin and the
java taglib in velocity with MVEL and my page doesn't display"
I'm not saying we shouldn't persue these endeavors, but I think it's
helpful to consider things from a new user perspective and decide if
we're going to support every combination of technology.
Tom
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: [s2] Roadmap for the core taglib
Posted by Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org>.
On Nov 4, 2007 9:33 AM, Tom Schneider <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Speaking of the core taglib, what ARE we going to do with it. There's
> been talk of moving them to a separate plugin, reimplementing them in a
> java, etc. It would be nice to know from a roadmap prespective about
> where the core taglib is headed--I have several plugins that would be
> affected by it.
My understanding is that we would like to move the existing tags to a
plugin, and create a standard bundle that would include the
tag-plugin, the code-behind plugin, and the core as a single JAR.
The code-behind plugin will subsume the zero-config and annotations
code, as well as the SmartURls plugin.
* [s2] Should tags be their own plugin?
* [S2] Plugins gone wild!
One place to document decisions like this is the STATUS.txt file under SVN.
* http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/struts/current/STATUS.txt?view=markup
In terms of the longer-term roadmap, work is being done on a JSP 2
taglib that won't use the templating system at all.
Don's also been doing some preliminary refactoring in XWork so that
the expression language can be made pluggable, meaning we would also
be able to plugin something else instead of OGNL.
-Ted.
>
> At a minimum, if we're going to keep the ftl template at all, then I
> would recommend we bring in tabletags. (At least the paging and sorting
> tags) Looking at the downloads page for tabletags, there have been over
> 7000 downloads over the last year. That seems significant to me. The
> table tag itself probably needs a little TLC at the moment, but I think
> the other tags are pretty solid. I'm also open to looking at other tags
> that should be brought in--again this is contingent on what we decide to
> do with them pesky tags.
> Tom
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
--
HTH, Ted <http://www.husted.com/ted/blog/>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org