tapestry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geoff Callender (JIRA)" <...@tapestry.apache.org>
Subject [jira] Created: (TAPESTRY-2703) ApplicationStateObject is a misleading term
Date Fri, 03 Oct 2008 12:22:44 GMT
ApplicationStateObject is a misleading term
-------------------------------------------

                 Key: TAPESTRY-2703
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-2703
             Project: Tapestry
          Issue Type: Improvement
          Components: tapestry-core
    Affects Versions: 5.0.15
            Reporter: Geoff Callender


This is a record of a discussion that went on in the mailing list on 16-18 Sep 2008.  I proposed
that the term ApplicationStateObject caused confusion.  Some agreed but not all.  Amongst
those who agreed, the discussion threw up some interesting food for thought, so I've captured
it here for further consideration.

Here's the e-mail that kicked it off.

	From: 	geoff.callender.jumpstart@gmail.com
	Subject: 	T5: ApplicationStateObject is misleading
	Date: 	16 September 2008 9:06:12 PM
	To: 	users@tapestry.apache.org

We want Tapestry to be as natural as possible for newcomers, so it's important to have terminology
that is not misleading. Right now might be the last chance to tidy some of these up before
T5.0 goes final.

One term that I believe many people find misleading is ApplicationState.  The problem is that
it implies it will make an object available across the whole application, ie. application-scoped;
which is not its purpose.

The doco says that ASOs "are unique to an individual user, not shared between users", which
is not quite right, either.  

The standard usage is to tie an object's scope to that of a web session, so maybe we should
put "session" in the name? Eg.

	@SessionScoped
	@SessionShared
	@ShareAcrossSession

It is important to understand that the term "session" here is NOT a reference to the persistence
mechanism, but a reference to the scope.

Alternatively, let's keep it really obvious with this:

	@StateObject

with the understanding that the default persistence strategy is "session".

What do others think?  Are you happy with ApplicationState?

Geoff


The discussion continued on these 2 threads:

* http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.tapestry.user/65601/focus=65601

* http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.tapestry.user/65638/focus=65638



-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


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


Mime
View raw message