You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Michael Wechner <mi...@wyona.com> on 2005/07/23 14:04:38 UTC
Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Hi
I would like to suggest that we move the TraversableGenerator into
Cocoon core.
It seems to me that the TraversableGenerator is very useful, because it
supports
the excalibur Source in general and not just the FileSource like the
DirectoryGenerator.
Otherwise people have to enable the repository block which has some
dependencies
which are not that obvious (e.g. JMS)
WDYT?
If most people are positive on this, does something like this require a
vote?
Thanks
Michi
--
Michael Wechner
Wyona - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
michael.wechner@wyona.com michi@apache.org
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Michael Wechner <mi...@wyona.com>.
Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
>
>
> ideally, the two would be merged, and the traversable generator would
> emit the directory xml format for file sources for compatibility
agreed, but I think for backwards compatibility reasons we cannot do this.
But we might want to deprecate the DirectoryGenerator and add an optional
parameter to the TraversableGenerator to enable the output in directory
generator syntax.
Makes sense?
Michi
> (with a clear note to change the stylesheets) and then eventually rip
> out the directory xml.
>
--
Michael Wechner
Wyona - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
michael.wechner@wyona.com michi@apache.org
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by "Gregor J. Rothfuss" <gr...@apache.org>.
Michael Wechner wrote:
> Hi
>
> I would like to suggest that we move the TraversableGenerator into
> Cocoon core.
>
> It seems to me that the TraversableGenerator is very useful, because it
> supports
> the excalibur Source in general and not just the FileSource like the
> DirectoryGenerator.
>
> Otherwise people have to enable the repository block which has some
> dependencies
> which are not that obvious (e.g. JMS)
>
> WDYT?
+1
ideally, the two would be merged, and the traversable generator would
emit the directory xml format for file sources for compatibility (with a
clear note to change the stylesheets) and then eventually rip out the
directory xml.
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Le 23 juil. 05, à 14:04, Michael Wechner a écrit :
> ...I would like to suggest that we move the TraversableGenerator into
> Cocoon core.
>
> It seems to me that the TraversableGenerator is very useful, because
> it supports
> the excalibur Source in general and not just the FileSource like the
> DirectoryGenerator...
+1, it seems to be a generally useful thing, compared to other
generators that we have in the core already.
Did you plan to move the XPathTraversableGenerator as well? I think
they should move together.
> If most people are positive on this, does something like this require
> a vote?
I think lazy consensus is good enough for this.
-Bertrand
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Michael Wechner <mi...@wyona.com>.
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Michael Wechner wrote:
>
>
> Nope. And while you're at it (/me is lazy), would you mind moving also
> CSVGenerator?
I just noticed that "joerg" has already moved the Traversables on Sat 23 ;-)
Michi
--
Michael Wechner
Wyona - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
michael.wechner@wyona.com michi@apache.org
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk>.
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> On 25.07.2005 10:57, Upayavira wrote:
>
>>> I have done it already yesterday. The main reason was that you don't
>>> seem to have commit rights on Cocoon:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~jim/projects.html#cocoon. Furthermore we
>>> talked about it since two years and nobody complained.
>>
>>
>> See this in subversion/authorisation/asf-authorisation:
>> [/cocoon]
>> @cocoon = rw
>> @lenya = rw
>>
>> We give Lenya committers commit rights on Cocoon. This is a better way
>> to do it than duplicating Lenya's committers into Cocoon's committers
>> list.
>
>
> Nothing against it. Do you know how Jim's list is generated? Does this
> not take the above into account?
No. Because a Lenya committer isn't any more a Cocoon committer. They
just have commit rights to our repository.
Regards, Upayavira
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 25.07.2005 10:57, Upayavira wrote:
>> I have done it already yesterday. The main reason was that you don't
>> seem to have commit rights on Cocoon:
>> http://people.apache.org/~jim/projects.html#cocoon. Furthermore we
>> talked about it since two years and nobody complained.
>
> See this in subversion/authorisation/asf-authorisation:
> [/cocoon]
> @cocoon = rw
> @lenya = rw
>
> We give Lenya committers commit rights on Cocoon. This is a better way
> to do it than duplicating Lenya's committers into Cocoon's committers list.
Nothing against it. Do you know how Jim's list is generated? Does this
not take the above into account?
Joerg
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk>.
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> On 24.07.2005 14:53, Michael Wechner wrote:
>
>> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>>
>>> Nope. And while you're at it (/me is lazy), would you mind moving
>>> also CSVGenerator?
>>
>>
>> sure (if nobody else minds). So I will move
>>
>> TraversableGenerator
>> XPathTraversableGenerator
>
>
> I have done it already yesterday. The main reason was that you don't
> seem to have commit rights on Cocoon:
> http://people.apache.org/~jim/projects.html#cocoon. Furthermore we
> talked about it since two years and nobody complained.
See this in subversion/authorisation/asf-authorisation:
[/cocoon]
@cocoon = rw
@lenya = rw
We give Lenya committers commit rights on Cocoon. This is a better way
to do it than duplicating Lenya's committers into Cocoon's committers list.
Upayavira
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 24.07.2005 22:08, Ralph Goers wrote:
> My understanding is that gump only builds the "latest" version. That
> would be trunk.
This should not prevent us from building 2.1 branch as it would control
also our dependencies between the blocks.
Joerg
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Ralph Goers <Ra...@dslextreme.com>.
> Joerg Heinicke wrote:
>
>> But I came across a strange thing: There is no scratchpad block in
>> the branch. Why? And why are the blocks in the branch not handled in
>> the same way (svn:external) as in trunk? Couldn't this be done
>> transparent to the users? And while we are at it: From what I see the
>> branch is not built by gump. Any reason for this?
>>
>> Joerg
>>
I'm not sure what the point would be in moving the blocks out in the
branch since we won't ever have real blocks there.
My understanding is that gump only builds the "latest" version. That
would be trunk.
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 25.07.2005 09:54, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> We voted some time ago to have the scratchpad block only once (in
> trunk). This makes developing new stuff easier as you don't have to
> synchronize with the branch etc.
Ok, did not kow that. I copied the CSVGenerator from trunk to the
branch. Will this cause any error?
> We could use svn:external for branch as well, but we can't point to the
> same version as trunk does. The blocks for trunk differ in some aspects
> (for example configuration, no Component interface).
Ah, there are already differences? Then it would indeed make not much
difference. I thought pointing with svn:external to the blocks dir would
avoid the duplication.
> I think we should really start seeing branch as what it should be: a
> maintenance branch ;) And try to get a 2.2 out asap.
Nothing agains it :-)
Joerg
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>.
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
>But I came across a strange thing: There is no scratchpad block in the
>branch. Why? And why are the blocks in the branch not handled in the
>same way (svn:external) as in trunk? Couldn't this be done transparent
>to the users? And while we are at it: From what I see the branch is
>not built by gump. Any reason for this?
We voted some time ago to have the scratchpad block only once (in
trunk). This makes developing new stuff easier as you don't have to
synchronize with the branch etc.
We could use svn:external for branch as well, but we can't point to the
same version as trunk does. The blocks for trunk differ in some aspects
(for example configuration, no Component interface).
I think we should really start seeing branch as what it should be: a
maintenance branch ;) And try to get a 2.2 out asap.
Carsten
--
Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG
http://www.s-und-n.de
http://www.osoco.org/weblogs/rael/
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Michael Wechner <mi...@wyona.com>.
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> On 24.07.2005 14:53, Michael Wechner wrote:
>
>> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>>
>>> Nope. And while you're at it (/me is lazy), would you mind moving
>>> also CSVGenerator?
>>
>>
>> sure (if nobody else minds). So I will move
>>
>> TraversableGenerator
>> XPathTraversableGenerator
>
>
> I have done it already yesterday.
thanks :-)
> The main reason was that you don't seem to have commit rights on
> Cocoon: http://people.apache.org/~jim/projects.html#cocoon.
because Lenya used to be a subproject I think I received write permission,
but yes, actually I am not a "real" committer to Cocoon
> Furthermore we talked about it since two years and nobody complained.
>
>> CVSGenerator
>
>
> CSV ;-)
right :-)
>
> I'm doing it at the moment.
thanks
Michi
> But I came across a strange thing: There is no scratchpad block in the
> branch. Why? And why are the blocks in the branch not handled in the
> same way (svn:external) as in trunk? Couldn't this be done transparent
> to the users? And while we are at it: From what I see the branch is
> not built by gump. Any reason for this?
>
> Joerg
>
--
Michael Wechner
Wyona - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
michael.wechner@wyona.com michi@apache.org
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@reverycodes.com>.
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> And why are the blocks in the
> branch not handled in the same way (svn:external) as in trunk?
(Some) blocks from the branch differ from the trunk versions due to changes in
Cocoon core.
Vadim
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 24.07.2005 14:53, Michael Wechner wrote:
> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
>> Nope. And while you're at it (/me is lazy), would you mind moving also
>> CSVGenerator?
>
> sure (if nobody else minds). So I will move
>
> TraversableGenerator
> XPathTraversableGenerator
I have done it already yesterday. The main reason was that you don't
seem to have commit rights on Cocoon:
http://people.apache.org/~jim/projects.html#cocoon. Furthermore we
talked about it since two years and nobody complained.
> CVSGenerator
CSV ;-)
I'm doing it at the moment. But I came across a strange thing: There is
no scratchpad block in the branch. Why? And why are the blocks in the
branch not handled in the same way (svn:external) as in trunk? Couldn't
this be done transparent to the users? And while we are at it: From what
I see the branch is not built by gump. Any reason for this?
Joerg
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Michael Wechner <mi...@wyona.com>.
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Nope. And while you're at it (/me is lazy), would you mind moving also
> CSVGenerator?
sure (if nobody else minds). So I will move
TraversableGenerator
XPathTraversableGenerator
CVSGenerator
I will try to do this by Wednesday or Thursday, because I will be offline
for the next 2 days. This gives also some more time for other people to
think
about it.
Michi
> There's been a number of people asking for this and didn't noticed we
> already had it!
>
> Sylvain
>
--
Michael Wechner
Wyona - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
michael.wechner@wyona.com michi@apache.org
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>.
Michael Wechner wrote:
> Hi
>
> I would like to suggest that we move the TraversableGenerator into
> Cocoon core.
>
> It seems to me that the TraversableGenerator is very useful, because
> it supports
> the excalibur Source in general and not just the FileSource like the
> DirectoryGenerator.
>
> Otherwise people have to enable the repository block which has some
> dependencies
> which are not that obvious (e.g. JMS)
>
> WDYT?
+1
> If most people are positive on this, does something like this require
> a vote?
Nope. And while you're at it (/me is lazy), would you mind moving also
CSVGenerator? There's been a number of people asking for this and didn't
noticed we already had it!
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://apache.org/~sylvain http://anyware-tech.com
Apache Software Foundation Member Research & Technology Director
Re: Moving TraversableGenerator into Cocoon core
Posted by Ralph Goers <Ra...@dslextreme.com>.
Michael Wechner wrote:
> Hi
>
> I would like to suggest that we move the TraversableGenerator into
> Cocoon core.
>
> It seems to me that the TraversableGenerator is very useful, because
> it supports
> the excalibur Source in general and not just the FileSource like the
> DirectoryGenerator.
>
> Otherwise people have to enable the repository block which has some
> dependencies
> which are not that obvious (e.g. JMS)
>
> WDYT?
+1
>
> If most people are positive on this, does something like this require
> a vote?
Just do it.
>
> Thanks
>
> Michi
>