You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@forrest.apache.org by Thorsten Scherler <th...@wyona.com> on 2006/08/10 11:05:07 UTC
Re: svn commit: r430235 - in /forrest/trunk/main/webapp/WEB-INF:
properties/dev/core.properties xconf/forrest-core.xconf
El jue, 10-08-2006 a las 04:09 +0000, crossley@apache.org escribió:
> Author: crossley
> Date: Wed Aug 9 21:09:40 2006
> New Revision: 430235
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=430235&view=rev
> Log:
> One demonstration of using Cocoon "running modes" to get a property into xconf.
> See FOR-917
I am not sure whether it is a good idea to have yet another properties
system.
The example you added seems to be a wee bit different then the
ForrestConfModule regarding the usage within xconf files. With the
"running modes" for example Cyriaque could implement the dynamic
serializer configuration that he wanted to implement the other day.
However we have now an overkill on properties systems (lm, defaults,
project and runnig modes, did I forgot some?) in forrest and I do not
think that is helping to make forrest simpler and easier to understand.
Shouldn't we consider to focus one only one or two, document them well
and harmonize their usage?
salu2
--
Thorsten Scherler
COO Spain
Wyona Inc. - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
thorsten.scherler@wyona.com thorsten@apache.org
Re: svn commit: r430235 - in /forrest/trunk/main/webapp/WEB-INF:
properties/dev/core.properties xconf/forrest-core.xconf
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>.
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> El jue, 10-08-2006 a las 21:10 +0100, Ross Gardler escribió:
>
>>Thorsten Scherler wrote:
>>
>>>El jue, 10-08-2006 a las 04:09 +0000, crossley@apache.org escribió:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Author: crossley
>>>>Date: Wed Aug 9 21:09:40 2006
>>>>New Revision: 430235
>>>>
>>>>URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=430235&view=rev
>>>>Log:
>>>>One demonstration of using Cocoon "running modes" to get a property into xconf.
>>>>See FOR-917
>>>
>>>
>>>I am not sure whether it is a good idea to have yet another properties
>>>system.
>>>
>>>The example you added seems to be a wee bit different then the
>>>ForrestConfModule regarding the usage within xconf files. With the
>>>"running modes" for example Cyriaque could implement the dynamic
>>>serializer configuration that he wanted to implement the other day.
>>>
>>>However we have now an overkill on properties systems (lm, defaults,
>>>project and runnig modes, did I forgot some?) in forrest and I do not
>>>think that is helping to make forrest simpler and easier to understand.
>>>
>>>Shouldn't we consider to focus one only one or two, document them well
>>>and harmonize their usage?
>>
>>+1, but which one?
>>
>
>
> In regards to my other mail I say:
> - locationmap for all properties that need to point to existing source
> - properties module (merge of defaults and project) aka forrestConf for
> all string based props.
I've not had time to digest that mail yet. Will respond in that thread
later (initial response seems positive).
Ross
Re: svn commit: r430235 - in /forrest/trunk/main/webapp/WEB-INF: properties/dev/core.properties xconf/forrest-core.xconf
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Adding a note for the mail archives. Discussion was at:
"Re: adding site-wide configuration files"
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.text.xml.forrest.devel/21981/focus=22026
-David
Re: svn commit: r430235 - in /forrest/trunk/main/webapp/WEB-INF:
properties/dev/core.properties xconf/forrest-core.xconf
Posted by Thorsten Scherler <th...@apache.org>.
El jue, 10-08-2006 a las 21:10 +0100, Ross Gardler escribió:
> Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> > El jue, 10-08-2006 a las 04:09 +0000, crossley@apache.org escribió:
> >
> >>Author: crossley
> >>Date: Wed Aug 9 21:09:40 2006
> >>New Revision: 430235
> >>
> >>URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=430235&view=rev
> >>Log:
> >>One demonstration of using Cocoon "running modes" to get a property into xconf.
> >>See FOR-917
> >
> >
> > I am not sure whether it is a good idea to have yet another properties
> > system.
> >
> > The example you added seems to be a wee bit different then the
> > ForrestConfModule regarding the usage within xconf files. With the
> > "running modes" for example Cyriaque could implement the dynamic
> > serializer configuration that he wanted to implement the other day.
> >
> > However we have now an overkill on properties systems (lm, defaults,
> > project and runnig modes, did I forgot some?) in forrest and I do not
> > think that is helping to make forrest simpler and easier to understand.
> >
> > Shouldn't we consider to focus one only one or two, document them well
> > and harmonize their usage?
>
> +1, but which one?
>
In regards to my other mail I say:
- locationmap for all properties that need to point to existing source
- properties module (merge of defaults and project) aka forrestConf for
all string based props.
Where we should support for 0.8 both file formats and for 0.9 only the
xml based one (a conversion class should not be too hard to implement).
Regarding the merge I found 69 matches for "{defaults:" and 1.055
matches for "{project:" in forrest instance (build incl.) This could be
replaced by "{property:defaults|project" then we just need to update the
xconf.
salu2
> Ross
>
--
thorsten
"Together we stand, divided we fall!"
Hey you (Pink Floyd)
Re: svn commit: r430235 - in /forrest/trunk/main/webapp/WEB-INF:
properties/dev/core.properties xconf/forrest-core.xconf
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>.
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> El jue, 10-08-2006 a las 04:09 +0000, crossley@apache.org escribió:
>
>>Author: crossley
>>Date: Wed Aug 9 21:09:40 2006
>>New Revision: 430235
>>
>>URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=430235&view=rev
>>Log:
>>One demonstration of using Cocoon "running modes" to get a property into xconf.
>>See FOR-917
>
>
> I am not sure whether it is a good idea to have yet another properties
> system.
>
> The example you added seems to be a wee bit different then the
> ForrestConfModule regarding the usage within xconf files. With the
> "running modes" for example Cyriaque could implement the dynamic
> serializer configuration that he wanted to implement the other day.
>
> However we have now an overkill on properties systems (lm, defaults,
> project and runnig modes, did I forgot some?) in forrest and I do not
> think that is helping to make forrest simpler and easier to understand.
>
> Shouldn't we consider to focus one only one or two, document them well
> and harmonize their usage?
+1, but which one?
Ross