Re: Set depraction for client side javascripts

[Felix Knecht <fe...@apache.org>]

> Or a new map:log statement we talked about a long time ago, e.g.
> <map:log level="warn" msg="{1} is deprecated"/>
>
> Nothing that can be done with an action though...
>
>   
I'm not quite sure but I think this [1] is the discussion about it.
Reading across I think at that time the problem was how to debug sitemap
and/or propagate messages in case of sitemap errors. When I'm right it
ended up in a deal to use cocoon stack trace [2] only and then see what
happens.

They way map:log would be used in this case is IMO different than the
usecase at that time.

WDYT about challenge the deal? Do we need nowadays the feature of map:log?

[1] http://marc.info/?t=107388969000001&r=1&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=107413092717327&w=2

Felix

Re: Set depraction for client side javascripts

[Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>]

Felix Knecht wrote:
>> Or a new map:log statement we talked about a long time ago, e.g.
>> <map:log level="warn" msg="{1} is deprecated"/>
>>
>> Nothing that can be done with an action though...
>>
>>   
> I'm not quite sure but I think this [1] is the discussion about it.
> Reading across I think at that time the problem was how to debug sitemap
> and/or propagate messages in case of sitemap errors. When I'm right it
> ended up in a deal to use cocoon stack trace [2] only and then see what
> happens.
> 
> They way map:log would be used in this case is IMO different than the
> usecase at that time.
> 
> WDYT about challenge the deal? Do we need nowadays the feature of map:log?
> 
:) I think, map:log and an action are identical in functionality and
identical in the amount of text you have to type to create the log
statement.

So I would say, if someone wants to extend the sitemap, fine...if
someone wants to go the faster way, and add the action, fine as well.
The action has the advantage that it can be/should be easily added to
2.1.x as well.

Carsten

-- 
Carsten Ziegeler
cziegeler@apache.org