You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomcat.apache.org by Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org> on 2010/10/08 03:29:03 UTC
[taglibs] How about splitting up the resource bundle?
Now that we require 1.5, I refactored Resources to use varargs rather than having multiple methods taking combinations of parameters. However, now that it is greatly simplified, i was wondering whether we should replace the single resource bundle containing messages for all implementations with smaller ones associated with each tag or tag library.
For example, moving the messages for core to o.a.t.s.tag.common.core.Resources.properties or for <c:import> to o.a.t.s.tag.common.core.importSupport.properties
Thoughts?
Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: [taglibs] How about splitting up the resource bundle?
Posted by Rahul Akolkar <ra...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org> wrote:
> Now that we require 1.5, I refactored Resources to use varargs rather than having multiple methods taking combinations of parameters. However, now that it is greatly simplified, i was wondering whether we should replace the single resource bundle containing messages for all implementations with smaller ones associated with each tag or tag library.
>
> For example, moving the messages for core to o.a.t.s.tag.common.core.Resources.properties or for <c:import> to o.a.t.s.tag.common.core.importSupport.properties
>
> Thoughts?
<snip/>
Don't see a large win as its not a particularly busy properties file
and at times its useful to have all messages in one place (quick
checks for consistency etc.)
-Rahul
> Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
[taglibs] JRE version, was: How about splitting up the resource bundle?
Posted by Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org>.
On Oct 8, 2010, at 10:40 AM, Kris Schneider wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Now that we require 1.5, I refactored Resources to use varargs rather than having multiple methods taking combinations of parameters. However, now that it is greatly simplified, i was wondering whether we should replace the single resource bundle containing messages for all implementations with smaller ones associated with each tag or tag library.
>
> When you say, "we require 1.5", are you talking about code
> specifically for a JSTL 1.2 impl? If it's code that's targeted at a
> JSTL 1.1 impl, then it should really run on something as crusty as
> Java 1.3 (minimum for a JSP 2.0 standalone container).
I was referring to trunk which would be our 1.2 impl which requires a JSP 2.1 container and JDK1.5. Of course, it stills need to support 1.1 and 1.0 tags but would be able use features from the newer runtime environment to do so. This is related to the other proposal for switching to the EL implementation provided by 2.1 (javax.el) rather than continuing to package our own.
Users needing to run in JSP2.0 and JDK1.3 or 1.4 environments could continue to use the 1.1.x branches with bugfixes backported as needed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: [taglibs] How about splitting up the resource bundle?
Posted by Kris Schneider <ks...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org> wrote:
> Now that we require 1.5, I refactored Resources to use varargs rather than having multiple methods taking combinations of parameters. However, now that it is greatly simplified, i was wondering whether we should replace the single resource bundle containing messages for all implementations with smaller ones associated with each tag or tag library.
When you say, "we require 1.5", are you talking about code
specifically for a JSTL 1.2 impl? If it's code that's targeted at a
JSTL 1.1 impl, then it should really run on something as crusty as
Java 1.3 (minimum for a JSP 2.0 standalone container).
> For example, moving the messages for core to o.a.t.s.tag.common.core.Resources.properties or for <c:import> to o.a.t.s.tag.common.core.importSupport.properties
>
> Thoughts?
> Jeremy
--
Kris Schneider
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org