Dave Johnson on open web technologies, social software and Java
Above: random photos from my Flickr photo-stream.
% tar xzvf roller-src-0.9.4.1.tgz % tar xzvf roller-tools-0.9.4.1.tgz % cd roller % build all
The machismo of this kind of U.S. business prose trickles through from the rhetoric of the sports field. The CEOs are the multimillion-dollar sports stars, the employees are encouraged to think of themselves as part of a winning team, and sales and marketing departments are heavy with the motivational chatter of sports. Playing the game, Red HerringI hate that motivation chatter but the fact that it is based on sports cliches is what really makes it unbearable.
[Struts] developers have a differing opinion on whether the Action class is part of the controller or the model. The argument for it being part of the controller is that it isn’t part of the “real” business logic. If Struts were replaced with an alternative framework, chances are the Action class would be replaced with something else. Therefore, it really isn’t part of the model domain, but rather tightly coupled to the Struts controller. It doesn’t make sense to put business logic into the Action, since other types of clients can’t easily reuse it. From Chapter 3 in the Server Side's Jakarta Struts Book Review ProjectIn the alternative framework WebWork, the action classes could be considered to be part of the model because they include no presentation specific code (i.e. no Servlet API calls). Some would argue that this is better and allows re-use of actions, but I think it is just different. For Roller, the WebWork approach really does not buy me much - my 'business logic' is already re-usable and encapsulated in my model interfaces and classes.