Factory method pattern
The ActionFactory should follow the Factory method pattern. Basically, it should provide a creational method which returns a concrete implementation of an abstract/interface type. In this case, it should return an implementation of the Action interface based on the information provided by the request. For example, the method and pathinfo (the pathinfo is the part after the context and servlet path in the request URL, excluding the query string).
public static Action getAction(HttpServletRequest request) {
return actions.get(request.getMethod() + request.getPathInfo());
}
The actions in turn should be some static/applicationwide Map
actions.put("POST/register", new RegisterAction());
actions.put("POST/login", new LoginAction());
actions.put("GET/logout", new LogoutAction());
// ...
Or configurable based on a properties/XML configuration file in the classpath: (pseudo)
for (Entry entry : configuration) {
actions.put(entry.getKey(), Class.forName(entry.getValue()).newInstance());
}
Or dynamically based on a scan in the classpath for classes implementing a certain interface and/or annotation: (pseudo)
for (ClassFile classFile : classpath) {
if (classFile.isInstanceOf(Action.class)) {
actions.put(classFile.getAnnotation("mapping"), classFile.newInstance());
}
}
Keep in mind to create a "do nothing" Action for the case there's no mapping. Let it for example return directly the request.getPathInfo().substring(1) then.
Other patterns
Those were the important patterns so far.
To get a step further, you could use the Facade pattern to create a Context class which in turn wraps the request and response objects and offers several convenience methods delegating to the request and response objects and pass that as argument into the Action#execute() method instead. This adds an extra abstract layer to hide the raw Servlet API away. You should then basically end up with zero import javax.servlet.* declarations in every Actionimplementation. In JSF terms, this is what the FacesContext and ExternalContext classes are doing.
Then there's the State pattern for the case that you'd like to add an extra abstraction layer to split the tasks of gathering the request parameters, converting them, validating them, updating the model values and execute the actions. In JSF terms, this is what the LifeCycle is doing.
Then there's the Composite pattern for the case that you'd like to create a component based view which can be attached with the model and whose behaviour depends on the state of the request based lifecycle. In JSF terms, this is what the UIComponent represent.
This way you can evolve bit by bit towards a component based framework.
I mostly prefer Criteria Queries for dynamic queries. For example it is much easier to add some ordering dynamically or leave some parts (e.g. restrictions) out depending on some parameter.
On the other hand I'm using HQL for static and complex queries, because it's much easier to understand/read HQL. Also, HQL is a bit more powerful, I think, e.g. for different join types.