You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@struts.apache.org by Ted Husted <te...@gmail.com> on 2005/11/12 16:37:02 UTC
Struts Action Framework ?
The website seems to be in pretty good shape now. I just ran build-all
on the applications subproject, and that's looking pretty good too. I
think that just leaves
* Reviewing the applications
* Adding the Actions package to PlugIns and renaming it Extra
If this all goes well, then I'm thinking we can roll 1.3.0 sometime next week.
Now about the whole "what to call it" thing :)
I was about to suggest "Struts Smurf", but, hey, why not go for the
next best thing?
We've called everything else "Action", why not call the framework that too? :)
OK, let's try it on for size:
Today, the Apache Struts project is comprised of two distinct
frameworks and several subprojects. The two frameworks are *Struts
Action* and *Struts Shale*. Struts Action is the original action/page
framework. Struts Shale is an event/component framework based on
JavaServer Faces.
...
Struts Action is a flexible control layer based on standard
technologies like Java Servlets, JavaBeans, ResourceBundles, and XML,
as well as various Jakarta Commons packages, like BeanUtils and Chain
of Responsibility. Action helps you create an extensible development
environment for your application, based on published standards and
proven design patterns.
....
Struts Action in a Nutshell
The framework's controller class, also called "Action", acts as a
bridge between the application's Model and the web View. When a
request is received, the Request Processor invokes an Action class.
The Action class consults with the Model (or, preferably, a Facade
representing your Model) to examine or update the application's state.
The framework provides an ActionForm class to help transfer data
between Model and View.
....
We could then call the bundle the "Struts Action Library".
Thoughts on calling the core of the original framework "Action"? Last call!
-Ted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts Action Framework - Struts CORe
Posted by Ted Husted <te...@gmail.com>.
On 11/14/05, Wolfgang Gehner <ne...@infonoia.com> wrote:
> Well, I happen to use 1.3 with Tiles in a portlet-like manner. I call an
> action (command) from a tiles definition. I have onEdit and onRender
> methods. Are portlets components? Then 1.3 opened the door to component
> orientation. New, WOW! All I'm saying instead of focusing on the old
> stuff which everyone already knows, let's communicate the new
> possibilities! And they are in the CORe chain. What we are really
> talking about is programmers being able to defend why they want to use
> Struts for another 5 years, with all that modern component wizardry around.
In my experience, the very best way to communicate possibilities is
with examples and documentation. It's great that you are using 1.3.
with Tiles in a portlet-like manner. If anyone would like to give back
to the project, please consider creating an example application or
HOWTO that describes what you are doing in your own projects.
We also have a new CookBook application in the Struts Apps subproject
[1]. (Thanks Steve!) I don't know if "Tiles as Portlets" can can be
boiled down to a cookbook recipe. But, if it can, we will have a place
to put it now!
We're in the midst of positioning Tiles as a standalone project [2],
and one of the problems we have is the original Tiles Developer's
Guide is out of date. If someone needs more to chew on, there will be
a lot to do there, especially in terms of documenting what Tiles can
*really* do.
It would also be wonderful to see more examples of using Struts with
the many, many extensions that are already available. Gizmos like
Struts-Menu, Struts-Layout, SSL Ext, Struts TestCase, and Struts
Velocity.
The original idea behind Struts SourceForge [3] was to be a home to
example applications. To date, the focus has been on extensions and
utilities, but it would be great to host more example applications
there.
Something that we moved to Struts SF, and then started to move back,
is the Resource Directory. The latest version on the wiki is nice [4],
but it's no where near complete. I've been wondering if we should try
moving the resource directory to a Confluence wiki [5], and maybe add
a blog to archive Announcements. I miss the days [6] when we were
*the* portal for everything Struts.
-Ted.
[1] - http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/struts/apps/trunk/cookbook/
[2] -http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/struts/sandbox/trunk/tiles/
[3] - http://struts.sourceforge.net/
[4] - http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsResources
[5] - http://opensource2.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/STRUTS/Home
[6] - http://struts.apache.org/struts-doc-1.1/news/news_2002_q4.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts Action Framework - Struts CORe
Posted by Wolfgang Gehner <ne...@infonoia.com>.
Martin Cooper wrote:
>On 11/13/05, Wolfgang Gehner <ne...@infonoia.com> wrote:
>
>
>>-1, the most important thing that Struts 1.3 allows us to get rid of is
>>the "extends Action", which becomes "implements Command". So the focus
>>should be on this.
>>
>>
>
>
>The "Action" in "Struts Action Framework" isn't the Action class.
>
Maybe true, it's just hard to communicate.
>It's
>action as in action-oriented, as distinct from component-oriented.
>Regardless of whether you choose to implement Actions or Commands, it's
>still an action-oriented framework.
>
>
Well, I happen to use 1.3 with Tiles in a portlet-like manner. I call an
action (command) from a tiles definition. I have onEdit and onRender
methods. Are portlets components? Then 1.3 opened the door to component
orientation. New, WOW! All I'm saying instead of focusing on the old
stuff which everyone already knows, let's communicate the new
possibilities! And they are in the CORe chain. What we are really
talking about is programmers being able to defend why they want to use
Struts for another 5 years, with all that modern component wizardry around.
Wolfgang
>--
>Martin Cooper
>
>
>The Command/Chain of Command= Chain of Responsibility=CoR leads me to
>
>
>>the name Struts COR(e).
>>
>>Spell it with an "e" at the end or without, but the use of CoR is really
>>the leap the framework has done to make it the technology choice of the
>>future.
>>
>>I see actions as a thing of the past. We use commands now. So does the
>>Struts Request processor. Struts has become a more generic Request
>>Processor. With the discussion on "action oriented" versus "component
>>oriented", I think the request processor has been rebuilt to allow both.
>>Which is the great news about 1.3. We've been doing actions for so long,
>>to that we are just learning to discover that greatness. Too bad if, via
>>naming, we were to somewhat limit the perspective to "action handling".
>>Even Shale uses a chain, and my wild guess is that both Shale and TI
>>will use the code in the Core subproject eventually; it's just such a
>>great piece of work.
>>
>>Action Framework sells it below value, IMHO. Today, in the age of
>>flexibility, it kind of puts itself in a corner for a particular kind of
>>usage.
>>
>>Maybe I missed some threads, but I think most people were OK to go with
>>CORE Library. So let me be a dissident on "Action".
>>
>>I love 1.3 and I just see that I would have a more difficult time
>>explaining why I "still" use Struts instead of Spring. That is if can't
>>flaunt
>>the fact that 1.3 is NEW, more open (flexible wiring is what sells
>>Spring), abd a *CORE* piece of solid code infrastructure. That's why I
>>believe in Struts CORe.
>>
>>Wolfgang Gehner
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>L.
>>>
>>>Ted Husted wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The website seems to be in pretty good shape now. I just ran build-all
>>>>on the applications subproject, and that's looking pretty good too. I
>>>>think that just leaves
>>>>
>>>>* Reviewing the applications
>>>>* Adding the Actions package to PlugIns and renaming it Extra
>>>>
>>>>If this all goes well, then I'm thinking we can roll 1.3.0 sometime
>>>>next week.
>>>>
>>>>Now about the whole "what to call it" thing :)
>>>>
>>>>I was about to suggest "Struts Smurf", but, hey, why not go for the
>>>>next best thing?
>>>>
>>>>We've called everything else "Action", why not call the framework
>>>>that too? :)
>>>>
>>>>OK, let's try it on for size:
>>>>
>>>>Today, the Apache Struts project is comprised of two distinct
>>>>frameworks and several subprojects. The two frameworks are *Struts
>>>>Action* and *Struts Shale*. Struts Action is the original action/page
>>>>framework. Struts Shale is an event/component framework based on
>>>>JavaServer Faces.
>>>>...
>>>>
>>>>Struts Action is a flexible control layer based on standard
>>>>technologies like Java Servlets, JavaBeans, ResourceBundles, and XML,
>>>>as well as various Jakarta Commons packages, like BeanUtils and Chain
>>>>of Responsibility. Action helps you create an extensible development
>>>>environment for your application, based on published standards and
>>>>proven design patterns.
>>>>....
>>>>
>>>>Struts Action in a Nutshell
>>>>
>>>>The framework's controller class, also called "Action", acts as a
>>>>bridge between the application's Model and the web View. When a
>>>>request is received, the Request Processor invokes an Action class.
>>>>The Action class consults with the Model (or, preferably, a Facade
>>>>representing your Model) to examine or update the application's state.
>>>>The framework provides an ActionForm class to help transfer data
>>>>between Model and View.
>>>>....
>>>>
>>>>We could then call the bundle the "Struts Action Library".
>>>>
>>>>Thoughts on calling the core of the original framework "Action"? Last
>>>>call!
>>>>
>>>>-Ted.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>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: Struts Action Framework - Struts CORe
Posted by Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org>.
On 11/13/05, Wolfgang Gehner <ne...@infonoia.com> wrote:
>
> -1, the most important thing that Struts 1.3 allows us to get rid of is
> the "extends Action", which becomes "implements Command". So the focus
> should be on this.
The "Action" in "Struts Action Framework" isn't the Action class. It's
action as in action-oriented, as distinct from component-oriented.
Regardless of whether you choose to implement Actions or Commands, it's
still an action-oriented framework.
--
Martin Cooper
The Command/Chain of Command= Chain of Responsibility=CoR leads me to
> the name Struts COR(e).
>
> Spell it with an "e" at the end or without, but the use of CoR is really
> the leap the framework has done to make it the technology choice of the
> future.
>
> I see actions as a thing of the past. We use commands now. So does the
> Struts Request processor. Struts has become a more generic Request
> Processor. With the discussion on "action oriented" versus "component
> oriented", I think the request processor has been rebuilt to allow both.
> Which is the great news about 1.3. We've been doing actions for so long,
> to that we are just learning to discover that greatness. Too bad if, via
> naming, we were to somewhat limit the perspective to "action handling".
> Even Shale uses a chain, and my wild guess is that both Shale and TI
> will use the code in the Core subproject eventually; it's just such a
> great piece of work.
>
> Action Framework sells it below value, IMHO. Today, in the age of
> flexibility, it kind of puts itself in a corner for a particular kind of
> usage.
>
> Maybe I missed some threads, but I think most people were OK to go with
> CORE Library. So let me be a dissident on "Action".
>
> I love 1.3 and I just see that I would have a more difficult time
> explaining why I "still" use Struts instead of Spring. That is if can't
> flaunt
> the fact that 1.3 is NEW, more open (flexible wiring is what sells
> Spring), abd a *CORE* piece of solid code infrastructure. That's why I
> believe in Struts CORe.
>
> Wolfgang Gehner
>
>
>
>
> >
> > L.
> >
> > Ted Husted wrote:
> >
> >> The website seems to be in pretty good shape now. I just ran build-all
> >> on the applications subproject, and that's looking pretty good too. I
> >> think that just leaves
> >>
> >> * Reviewing the applications
> >> * Adding the Actions package to PlugIns and renaming it Extra
> >>
> >> If this all goes well, then I'm thinking we can roll 1.3.0 sometime
> >> next week.
> >>
> >> Now about the whole "what to call it" thing :)
> >>
> >> I was about to suggest "Struts Smurf", but, hey, why not go for the
> >> next best thing?
> >>
> >> We've called everything else "Action", why not call the framework
> >> that too? :)
> >>
> >> OK, let's try it on for size:
> >>
> >> Today, the Apache Struts project is comprised of two distinct
> >> frameworks and several subprojects. The two frameworks are *Struts
> >> Action* and *Struts Shale*. Struts Action is the original action/page
> >> framework. Struts Shale is an event/component framework based on
> >> JavaServer Faces.
> >> ...
> >>
> >> Struts Action is a flexible control layer based on standard
> >> technologies like Java Servlets, JavaBeans, ResourceBundles, and XML,
> >> as well as various Jakarta Commons packages, like BeanUtils and Chain
> >> of Responsibility. Action helps you create an extensible development
> >> environment for your application, based on published standards and
> >> proven design patterns.
> >> ....
> >>
> >> Struts Action in a Nutshell
> >>
> >> The framework's controller class, also called "Action", acts as a
> >> bridge between the application's Model and the web View. When a
> >> request is received, the Request Processor invokes an Action class.
> >> The Action class consults with the Model (or, preferably, a Facade
> >> representing your Model) to examine or update the application's state.
> >> The framework provides an ActionForm class to help transfer data
> >> between Model and View.
> >> ....
> >>
> >> We could then call the bundle the "Struts Action Library".
> >>
> >> Thoughts on calling the core of the original framework "Action"? Last
> >> call!
> >>
> >> -Ted.
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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: Struts Action Framework - Struts CORe
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
If there *really is* a consensus that a new name is needed, I would +1
this one over Struts Action, or any of the previous contenders.
Frank
netsql wrote:
>
> +1
>
> Wolfgang Gehner wrote:
>
>>
>> The Command/Chain of Command= Chain of Responsibility=CoR leads me to
>> the name Struts COR(e).
>>
>
>
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
AIM: fzammetti
Yahoo: fzammetti
MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts Action Framework - Struts CORe
Posted by netsql <ne...@roomity.com>.
+1
Wolfgang Gehner wrote:
>
> The Command/Chain of Command= Chain of Responsibility=CoR leads me to
> the name Struts COR(e).
>
--
thx,
.V
Your Roomity Broadband Community <http://roomity.com/demo.jsp>
cell: 917 825 3035 in DFW
email: netsql at roomity.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts Action Framework - Struts CORe
Posted by Wolfgang Gehner <ne...@infonoia.com>.
-1, the most important thing that Struts 1.3 allows us to get rid of is
the "extends Action", which becomes "implements Command". So the focus
should be on this.
The Command/Chain of Command= Chain of Responsibility=CoR leads me to
the name Struts COR(e).
Spell it with an "e" at the end or without, but the use of CoR is really
the leap the framework has done to make it the technology choice of the
future.
I see actions as a thing of the past. We use commands now. So does the
Struts Request processor. Struts has become a more generic Request
Processor. With the discussion on "action oriented" versus "component
oriented", I think the request processor has been rebuilt to allow both.
Which is the great news about 1.3. We've been doing actions for so long,
to that we are just learning to discover that greatness. Too bad if, via
naming, we were to somewhat limit the perspective to "action handling".
Even Shale uses a chain, and my wild guess is that both Shale and TI
will use the code in the Core subproject eventually; it's just such a
great piece of work.
Action Framework sells it below value, IMHO. Today, in the age of
flexibility, it kind of puts itself in a corner for a particular kind of
usage.
Maybe I missed some threads, but I think most people were OK to go with
CORE Library. So let me be a dissident on "Action".
I love 1.3 and I just see that I would have a more difficult time
explaining why I "still" use Struts instead of Spring. That is if can't
flaunt
the fact that 1.3 is NEW, more open (flexible wiring is what sells
Spring), abd a *CORE* piece of solid code infrastructure. That's why I
believe in Struts CORe.
Wolfgang Gehner
>
> L.
>
> Ted Husted wrote:
>
>> The website seems to be in pretty good shape now. I just ran build-all
>> on the applications subproject, and that's looking pretty good too. I
>> think that just leaves
>>
>> * Reviewing the applications
>> * Adding the Actions package to PlugIns and renaming it Extra
>>
>> If this all goes well, then I'm thinking we can roll 1.3.0 sometime
>> next week.
>>
>> Now about the whole "what to call it" thing :)
>>
>> I was about to suggest "Struts Smurf", but, hey, why not go for the
>> next best thing?
>>
>> We've called everything else "Action", why not call the framework
>> that too? :)
>>
>> OK, let's try it on for size:
>>
>> Today, the Apache Struts project is comprised of two distinct
>> frameworks and several subprojects. The two frameworks are *Struts
>> Action* and *Struts Shale*. Struts Action is the original action/page
>> framework. Struts Shale is an event/component framework based on
>> JavaServer Faces.
>> ...
>>
>> Struts Action is a flexible control layer based on standard
>> technologies like Java Servlets, JavaBeans, ResourceBundles, and XML,
>> as well as various Jakarta Commons packages, like BeanUtils and Chain
>> of Responsibility. Action helps you create an extensible development
>> environment for your application, based on published standards and
>> proven design patterns.
>> ....
>>
>> Struts Action in a Nutshell
>>
>> The framework's controller class, also called "Action", acts as a
>> bridge between the application's Model and the web View. When a
>> request is received, the Request Processor invokes an Action class.
>> The Action class consults with the Model (or, preferably, a Facade
>> representing your Model) to examine or update the application's state.
>> The framework provides an ActionForm class to help transfer data
>> between Model and View.
>> ....
>>
>> We could then call the bundle the "Struts Action Library".
>>
>> Thoughts on calling the core of the original framework "Action"? Last
>> call!
>>
>> -Ted.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Struts Action Framework ?
Posted by Laurie Harper <la...@holoweb.net>.
+1, much better than Classic and makes sense to anyone already familiar
with Struts. Still not sure about 'Library' though.
L.
Ted Husted wrote:
> The website seems to be in pretty good shape now. I just ran build-all
> on the applications subproject, and that's looking pretty good too. I
> think that just leaves
>
> * Reviewing the applications
> * Adding the Actions package to PlugIns and renaming it Extra
>
> If this all goes well, then I'm thinking we can roll 1.3.0 sometime next week.
>
> Now about the whole "what to call it" thing :)
>
> I was about to suggest "Struts Smurf", but, hey, why not go for the
> next best thing?
>
> We've called everything else "Action", why not call the framework that too? :)
>
> OK, let's try it on for size:
>
> Today, the Apache Struts project is comprised of two distinct
> frameworks and several subprojects. The two frameworks are *Struts
> Action* and *Struts Shale*. Struts Action is the original action/page
> framework. Struts Shale is an event/component framework based on
> JavaServer Faces.
> ...
>
> Struts Action is a flexible control layer based on standard
> technologies like Java Servlets, JavaBeans, ResourceBundles, and XML,
> as well as various Jakarta Commons packages, like BeanUtils and Chain
> of Responsibility. Action helps you create an extensible development
> environment for your application, based on published standards and
> proven design patterns.
> ....
>
> Struts Action in a Nutshell
>
> The framework's controller class, also called "Action", acts as a
> bridge between the application's Model and the web View. When a
> request is received, the Request Processor invokes an Action class.
> The Action class consults with the Model (or, preferably, a Facade
> representing your Model) to examine or update the application's state.
> The framework provides an ActionForm class to help transfer data
> between Model and View.
> ....
>
> We could then call the bundle the "Struts Action Library".
>
> Thoughts on calling the core of the original framework "Action"? Last call!
>
> -Ted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts Action Framework ?
Posted by Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org>.
On 11/12/05, Ted Husted <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The website seems to be in pretty good shape now. I just ran build-all
> on the applications subproject, and that's looking pretty good too. I
> think that just leaves
>
> * Reviewing the applications
> * Adding the Actions package to PlugIns and renaming it Extra
>
> If this all goes well, then I'm thinking we can roll 1.3.0 sometime next
> week.
>
> Now about the whole "what to call it" thing :)
>
> I was about to suggest "Struts Smurf", but, hey, why not go for the
> next best thing?
Nah, I like Struts Gromit much better. ;-) Shale could then be renamed to
Struts Wallace.
We've called everything else "Action", why not call the framework that too?
> :)
>
> OK, let's try it on for size:
>
> Today, the Apache Struts project is comprised of two distinct
> frameworks and several subprojects. The two frameworks are *Struts
> Action* and *Struts Shale*. Struts Action is the original action/page
> framework. Struts Shale is an event/component framework based on
> JavaServer Faces.
I like the term "Struts Action Framework", but just "Struts Action" feels a
little stilted. Not that I have any better ideas.
Also, I prefer "action-oriented" and "component-oriented" over "action/page"
and "event/component".
--
Martin Cooper
...
>
> Struts Action is a flexible control layer based on standard
> technologies like Java Servlets, JavaBeans, ResourceBundles, and XML,
> as well as various Jakarta Commons packages, like BeanUtils and Chain
> of Responsibility. Action helps you create an extensible development
> environment for your application, based on published standards and
> proven design patterns.
> ....
>
> Struts Action in a Nutshell
>
> The framework's controller class, also called "Action", acts as a
> bridge between the application's Model and the web View. When a
> request is received, the Request Processor invokes an Action class.
> The Action class consults with the Model (or, preferably, a Facade
> representing your Model) to examine or update the application's state.
> The framework provides an ActionForm class to help transfer data
> between Model and View.
> ....
>
> We could then call the bundle the "Struts Action Library".
>
> Thoughts on calling the core of the original framework "Action"? Last
> call!
>
> -Ted.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
Re: Struts Action Framework ?
Posted by Michael Jouravlev <jm...@gmail.com>.
On 11/12/05, Ted Husted <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Now about the whole "what to call it" thing :)
>
> We've called everything else "Action", why not call the framework that too? :)
+1 Better that previous attempts.
> Struts Action in a Nutshell
>
> The framework's controller class, also called "Action", acts as a
> bridge between the application's Model and the web View. When a
> request is received, the Request Processor invokes an Action class.
According to http://java.sun.com/blueprints/corej2eepatterns/Patterns/FrontController.html
it seems to me that Action is a Dispatcher:
* ActionServlet, RequestProcessor: Controller (J2EE); Handler (.NET)
* Action: Dispatcher (J2EE); part of Command (.NET)
* ActionForm: part of Command (.NET)
* JSP page: view
On 11/12/05, Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> Also, I prefer "action-oriented" and "component-oriented" over "action/page"
> and "event/component".
Right, because it is possible (and easy) to use event-based approach
in Struts (DispatchAction et al).
Michael.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts Action Framework ?
Posted by Hubert Rabago <hr...@gmail.com>.
On 11/12/05, Ted Husted <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thoughts on calling the core of the original framework "Action"? Last call!
>
> -Ted.
+1.
I like it much better than classic.
Hubert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts Action Framework ?
Posted by Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com>.
On 11/12/05, Ted Husted <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Now about the whole "what to call it" thing :)
>
> I was about to suggest "Struts Smurf", but, hey, why not go for the
> next best thing?
>
> We've called everything else "Action", why not call the framework that too? :)
As long as it starts with Struts and ends with 1.3, I don't have a
strong opinion about what to put in the middle.
--
Wendy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts Action Framework ?
Posted by James Mitchell <ja...@mac.com>.
I agree that renaming it makes sense to us (because those of us on
this list are in the thick of it), but could be very confusing to
people who already think of "Struts Action" or "Struts Classic" as
just "Struts".
I'll still be here whatever you guys decide ;)
--
James Mitchell
678.910.8017
On Nov 12, 2005, at 7:10 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
> My +1 is to just carry on calling it Struts and don't see any need to
> change. I think everyone gets it that we have two frameworks - one
> called
> "Shale" and the other "Struts" and any confusion about the Struts
> "project"
> and Struts "framework" is minor. Changing how we label the
> framework is more
> confusing IMO and reduces clarity ;-).
>
> Also I believe Shale has/is doing a good job of establishing its name
> (including using the "org.apache.shale" package) that there is no
> need to
> have to qualify "Struts".
>
> How about we make the Struts home page more explicit, something
> like the
> following...
>
> <h1>Struts - One Project, Two Frameworks<h1>
> The Struts project.....
>
> <h2>Struts Framework</h2>
> The Struts framework.....
>
> <h2>Shale Framework</h2>
> The Shale framework.....
>
> Niall
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ted Husted" <te...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 3:37 PM
>
>
> The website seems to be in pretty good shape now. I just ran build-all
> on the applications subproject, and that's looking pretty good too. I
> think that just leaves
>
> * Reviewing the applications
> * Adding the Actions package to PlugIns and renaming it Extra
>
> If this all goes well, then I'm thinking we can roll 1.3.0 sometime
> next
> week.
>
> Now about the whole "what to call it" thing :)
>
> I was about to suggest "Struts Smurf", but, hey, why not go for the
> next best thing?
>
> We've called everything else "Action", why not call the framework
> that too?
> :)
>
> OK, let's try it on for size:
>
> Today, the Apache Struts project is comprised of two distinct
> frameworks and several subprojects. The two frameworks are *Struts
> Action* and *Struts Shale*. Struts Action is the original action/page
> framework. Struts Shale is an event/component framework based on
> JavaServer Faces.
> ...
>
> Struts Action is a flexible control layer based on standard
> technologies like Java Servlets, JavaBeans, ResourceBundles, and XML,
> as well as various Jakarta Commons packages, like BeanUtils and Chain
> of Responsibility. Action helps you create an extensible development
> environment for your application, based on published standards and
> proven design patterns.
> ....
>
> Struts Action in a Nutshell
>
> The framework's controller class, also called "Action", acts as a
> bridge between the application's Model and the web View. When a
> request is received, the Request Processor invokes an Action class.
> The Action class consults with the Model (or, preferably, a Facade
> representing your Model) to examine or update the application's state.
> The framework provides an ActionForm class to help transfer data
> between Model and View.
> ....
>
> We could then call the bundle the "Struts Action Library".
>
> Thoughts on calling the core of the original framework "Action"?
> Last call!
>
> -Ted.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Struts Action Framework ?
Posted by Niall Pemberton <ni...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
My +1 is to just carry on calling it Struts and don't see any need to
change. I think everyone gets it that we have two frameworks - one called
"Shale" and the other "Struts" and any confusion about the Struts "project"
and Struts "framework" is minor. Changing how we label the framework is more
confusing IMO and reduces clarity ;-).
Also I believe Shale has/is doing a good job of establishing its name
(including using the "org.apache.shale" package) that there is no need to
have to qualify "Struts".
How about we make the Struts home page more explicit, something like the
following...
<h1>Struts - One Project, Two Frameworks<h1>
The Struts project.....
<h2>Struts Framework</h2>
The Struts framework.....
<h2>Shale Framework</h2>
The Shale framework.....
Niall
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Husted" <te...@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 3:37 PM
The website seems to be in pretty good shape now. I just ran build-all
on the applications subproject, and that's looking pretty good too. I
think that just leaves
* Reviewing the applications
* Adding the Actions package to PlugIns and renaming it Extra
If this all goes well, then I'm thinking we can roll 1.3.0 sometime next
week.
Now about the whole "what to call it" thing :)
I was about to suggest "Struts Smurf", but, hey, why not go for the
next best thing?
We've called everything else "Action", why not call the framework that too?
:)
OK, let's try it on for size:
Today, the Apache Struts project is comprised of two distinct
frameworks and several subprojects. The two frameworks are *Struts
Action* and *Struts Shale*. Struts Action is the original action/page
framework. Struts Shale is an event/component framework based on
JavaServer Faces.
...
Struts Action is a flexible control layer based on standard
technologies like Java Servlets, JavaBeans, ResourceBundles, and XML,
as well as various Jakarta Commons packages, like BeanUtils and Chain
of Responsibility. Action helps you create an extensible development
environment for your application, based on published standards and
proven design patterns.
....
Struts Action in a Nutshell
The framework's controller class, also called "Action", acts as a
bridge between the application's Model and the web View. When a
request is received, the Request Processor invokes an Action class.
The Action class consults with the Model (or, preferably, a Facade
representing your Model) to examine or update the application's state.
The framework provides an ActionForm class to help transfer data
between Model and View.
....
We could then call the bundle the "Struts Action Library".
Thoughts on calling the core of the original framework "Action"? Last call!
-Ted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Struts Action Framework ?
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
I've given my opinion in the past, but for the record in this thread...
Just call it Struts. Period, end of story.
Anything else is, IMO, a superfluous, likely confusing change. I see no
point in it and I believe it to be a bad idea.
Count me -1, non-binding of course.
Frank
Ted Husted wrote:
> The website seems to be in pretty good shape now. I just ran build-all
> on the applications subproject, and that's looking pretty good too. I
> think that just leaves
>
> * Reviewing the applications
> * Adding the Actions package to PlugIns and renaming it Extra
>
> If this all goes well, then I'm thinking we can roll 1.3.0 sometime next week.
>
> Now about the whole "what to call it" thing :)
>
> I was about to suggest "Struts Smurf", but, hey, why not go for the
> next best thing?
>
> We've called everything else "Action", why not call the framework that too? :)
>
> OK, let's try it on for size:
>
> Today, the Apache Struts project is comprised of two distinct
> frameworks and several subprojects. The two frameworks are *Struts
> Action* and *Struts Shale*. Struts Action is the original action/page
> framework. Struts Shale is an event/component framework based on
> JavaServer Faces.
> ...
>
> Struts Action is a flexible control layer based on standard
> technologies like Java Servlets, JavaBeans, ResourceBundles, and XML,
> as well as various Jakarta Commons packages, like BeanUtils and Chain
> of Responsibility. Action helps you create an extensible development
> environment for your application, based on published standards and
> proven design patterns.
> ....
>
> Struts Action in a Nutshell
>
> The framework's controller class, also called "Action", acts as a
> bridge between the application's Model and the web View. When a
> request is received, the Request Processor invokes an Action class.
> The Action class consults with the Model (or, preferably, a Facade
> representing your Model) to examine or update the application's state.
> The framework provides an ActionForm class to help transfer data
> between Model and View.
> ....
>
> We could then call the bundle the "Struts Action Library".
>
> Thoughts on calling the core of the original framework "Action"? Last call!
>
> -Ted.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
>
>
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
AIM: fzammetti
Yahoo: fzammetti
MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org