Re: Packaging Struts Extras (Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34849] - [new feature] Expressi)on Language Field Validator

[Michael Jouravlev <jm...@gmail.com>]

I would say, if something is relatively separate, and does not have
dependencies, nor impose dependencies, make is a separate jar, not
just a package. On the other hand, I will have some stuff that I will
like to include as close to the core as possible, so I better shut up
;-)

On 5/10/05, Joe Germuska <Jo...@germuska.com> wrote:
> This seems like a discussion which should happen more visibly than in
> a Bugzilla ticket, so I'm addressing it more clearly to the
> dev@struts list:
> 
> Regarding a JEXL-based validator to plug in to Struts'
> commons-validator bridge:
> >http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34849
> >
> >------- Additional Comments From mrdon@twdata.org  2005-05-10 21:11 -------
> >I put out two other similar patches which used jxpath and beanshell
> >respectively.  It was suggested validator should have an "extras" section, and
> >if created, perhaps that would be a good place for this as well.
> 
> I'd be ok with putting these in some package other than struts-core,
> although I don't think we have anything really obvious right now.
> Then again, I've been wanting to get a JEXL dependency into Struts to
> suit my vision of auto-loading per-action (and per-forward) commands
> -- but those could go in this other kit as well.  We could probably
> factor out most everything under o.a.struts.actions as well -- is it
> right to push it all into its own soup?  What would we call it?
> 
> Is it worth having a validator-only extras package?  Or just lob 'em
> all in one?  If Validator itself were factored out of the core, would
> people still feel strongly that these things wouldn't belong in a
> validator JAR artifact?
> 
> Joe

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org