You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Daniel Fagerstrom <da...@nada.kth.se> on 2005/05/26 13:41:56 UTC
Re: Other default cocoon resources
Leszek Gawron wrote:
> Reinhard Poetz wrote:
>
>> Should we move the stylesheets
>
> I would help a lot to be able to deploy cocoon with no additional
> files at all. What do you say if we moved cocoon logo and default
> stylesheets (the ones styling error pages etc.) to some jar (either
> existing or a new one)?
A new one. IMO we should move away from the monolitic thinking and start
to think in terms of pluggins/bundles/blocks. Making the minimal Cocoon
really lean would help using it embeded in new and innovative contexts,
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=111366405100002&r=1&w=2.
> This way we can have cocoon that consists of:
> - bunch of .jar files
> - web.xml which hardly changes
> - a set of .xconf and logkit files.
+1
> It's a pity we cannot move .xconf files into jars.
Why can't we?
> This way cocoon would be much more friendly for dependency resolution
> tools like maven.
/Daniel
Re: Other default cocoon resources
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>.
Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
> Leszek Gawron wrote:
>> AFAIR due to the fact that resource:/ protocol is not as functional
>> as file:/ (no directiories?) and it would be quite intensive
>> operation to find .xconf files.
>
>
> Carsten made the resource: protocol traversable a couple of months ago.
Nope, this was "context:"...
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://apache.org/~sylvain http://anyware-tech.com
Apache Software Foundation Member Research & Technology Director
Re: Other default cocoon resources
Posted by Daniel Fagerstrom <da...@nada.kth.se>.
Leszek Gawron wrote:
> Reinhard Poetz wrote:
>
>> Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
>>
>>> Leszek Gawron wrote:
>>>
>>>> Reinhard Poetz wrote:
>>>
<snip/>
>>>> It's a pity we cannot move .xconf files into jars.
>>>
>>> Why can't we?
>>
> AFAIR due to the fact that resource:/ protocol is not as functional as
> file:/ (no directiories?) and it would be quite intensive operation to
> find .xconf files.
Carsten made the resource: protocol traversable a couple of months ago.
/Daniel
Re: Other default cocoon resources
Posted by Leszek Gawron <lg...@mobilebox.pl>.
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
>
>> Leszek Gawron wrote:
>>
>>> Reinhard Poetz wrote:
>>>
>>>> Should we move the stylesheets
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I would help a lot to be able to deploy cocoon with no additional
>>> files at all. What do you say if we moved cocoon logo and default
>>> stylesheets (the ones styling error pages etc.) to some jar (either
>>> existing or a new one)?
>>
>>
>>
>> A new one. IMO we should move away from the monolitic thinking and
>> start to think in terms of pluggins/bundles/blocks. Making the minimal
>> Cocoon really lean would help using it embeded in new and innovative
>> contexts, http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=111366405100002&r=1&w=2.
>>
>>> This way we can have cocoon that consists of:
>>> - bunch of .jar files
>>> - web.xml which hardly changes
>>> - a set of .xconf and logkit files.
>>
>>
>>
>> +1
>>
>>> It's a pity we cannot move .xconf files into jars.
>>
>>
>>
>> Why can't we?
AFAIR due to the fact that resource:/ protocol is not as functional as
file:/ (no directiories?) and it would be quite intensive operation to
find .xconf files.
>
>
> theoretically we can but soon we will have .cob files that *are* single
> files. So for now *I* wouldn't invest too much work.
What will cocoon core consist of then? I mean file types..
--
Leszek Gawron lgawron@mobilebox.pl
Project Manager MobileBox sp. z o.o.
+48 (61) 855 06 67 http://www.mobilebox.pl
mobile: +48 (501) 720 812 fax: +48 (61) 853 29 65
Re: Other default cocoon resources
Posted by Reinhard Poetz <re...@apache.org>.
Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
> Leszek Gawron wrote:
>
>> Reinhard Poetz wrote:
>>
>>> Should we move the stylesheets
>>
>>
>> I would help a lot to be able to deploy cocoon with no additional
>> files at all. What do you say if we moved cocoon logo and default
>> stylesheets (the ones styling error pages etc.) to some jar (either
>> existing or a new one)?
>
>
> A new one. IMO we should move away from the monolitic thinking and start
> to think in terms of pluggins/bundles/blocks. Making the minimal Cocoon
> really lean would help using it embeded in new and innovative contexts,
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=111366405100002&r=1&w=2.
>
>> This way we can have cocoon that consists of:
>> - bunch of .jar files
>> - web.xml which hardly changes
>> - a set of .xconf and logkit files.
>
>
> +1
>
>> It's a pity we cannot move .xconf files into jars.
>
>
> Why can't we?
theoretically we can but soon we will have .cob files that *are* single files.
So for now *I* wouldn't invest too much work.
--
Reinhard Pötz Independent Consultant, Trainer & (IT)-Coach
{Software Engineering, Open Source, Web Applications, Apache Cocoon}
web(log): http://www.poetz.cc
--------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 1GB Speicher kostenlos - Hier anmelden: http://mail.yahoo.de