You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Reinhard Pötz <re...@apache.org> on 2004/03/09 16:34:35 UTC
[Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> We should move XSP in a block anyway.
+1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard
--
Reinhard, giving this thread an appropriate subject but doesn't mean he will do the move ;-)
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 09.03.2004 16:34, Reinhard Pötz wrote:
>> We should move XSP in a block anyway.
+1
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Stephan Michels <st...@apache.org>.
Am Di, den 09.03.2004 schrieb Unico Hommes um 16:39:
> Reinhard Pötz wrote:
>
> > Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> >
> >> We should move XSP in a block anyway.
> >
> >
> >
> > +1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard
> >
> +1
Big +1
Stephan Michels.
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Unico Hommes <un...@hippo.nl>.
Reinhard Pötz wrote:
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
>> We should move XSP in a block anyway.
>
>
>
> +1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard
>
+1
--
Unico
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Daniel Fagerstrom <da...@nada.kth.se>.
Reinhard Pötz wrote:
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
>> We should move XSP in a block anyway.
>
>
>
> +1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard
>
+1
/Daniel
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Steve Krulewitz <sh...@mm.st>.
> Please note that currently jxtransformer/generator is not up to speed in
> non-flow environment. It has to be extended / completed first in order
> to be xsp replacement.
Yes, this is certainly needed to help the jxtransformer/generator
conquer XSP. I am currently using the JXTemplateGenerator to try to
replace XSP, but to allow the JXTemplateGenerator to access values from
the action, I do:
Map bean = new HashMap();
bean.put("at", at);
FlowHelper.setContextObject(objectModel, bean);
In the action. I think i might be able to pass this as a parameter to
the JXTemplateGenerator, but this way seems cleaner.
Is there a way to access this object from the JXTemplateGenerator if I
just return it as the method's return?
cheers,
-steve
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@reverycodes.com>.
Unico Hommes wrote:
> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
...
>> Please note that currently jxtransformer/generator is not up to speed
>> in non-flow environment. It has to be extended / completed first in
>> order to be xsp replacement.
>>
> Could you expand on this? What are the current limitations? I just
> migrated the modules samples from xsp to jx. Should we wait with more
> migration until this is solved?
Here:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=107697100108808&w=2
All "cocoon.*" variables are accessible only in flow, and "request",
"response", etc are deprecated. I'm in favor of implementing "cocoon.*"
for jxtemplate outside of flow, but don't have time ATM.
Vadim
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Unico Hommes <un...@hippo.nl>.
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> Unico Hommes wrote:
>
>> Unico Hommes wrote:
>>
>>> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>
>>
> ...
>
>>>> Interestingly some of these samples (e.g. flow) are ported in 2.2
>>>> from xsp to jx...
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Yep I already started doing some work in that department :-)
>>>
>> BTW. this was done only in the flow samples and regarding me wanting
>> to test the flow functionality with the componentized processor. I'll
>> take care of backporting that stuff to 2.1
>
>
>
> Please note that currently jxtransformer/generator is not up to speed
> in non-flow environment. It has to be extended / completed first in
> order to be xsp replacement.
>
Could you expand on this? What are the current limitations? I just
migrated the modules samples from xsp to jx. Should we wait with more
migration until this is solved?
--
Unico
RE: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> Please note that currently jxtransformer/generator is not up
> to speed in non-flow environment. It has to be extended /
> completed first in order to be xsp replacement.
>
I hope to come up with a solution in the next weeks
Carsten
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@reverycodes.com>.
Unico Hommes wrote:
> Unico Hommes wrote:
>
>> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
...
>>> Interestingly some of these samples (e.g. flow) are ported in 2.2
>>> from xsp to jx...
>>>
>>>
>> Yep I already started doing some work in that department :-)
>>
> BTW. this was done only in the flow samples and regarding me wanting
> to test the flow functionality with the componentized processor. I'll
> take care of backporting that stuff to 2.1
Please note that currently jxtransformer/generator is not up to speed in
non-flow environment. It has to be extended / completed first in order
to be xsp replacement.
Vadim
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Unico Hommes <un...@hippo.nl>.
Unico Hommes wrote:
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
>> Unico Hommes wrote:
>>
>>> Awsome, I'm willing to do some stuff as well. I think that besides
>>> just moving code around it involves some work regarding quite a few
>>> core samples that use XSP. Here's a list:
>>>
>>> ./common/view-source.xsp
>>> ./flow/calc/screens/displayResult.xsp
>>> ./flow/calc/screens/getNumberA.xsp
>>> ./flow/calc/screens/getNumberB.xsp
>>> ./flow/calc/screens/getOperator.xsp
>>> ./flow/prefs/screens/login.xsp
>>> ./flow/prefs/screens/registrationSuccessful.xsp
>>> ./flow/prefs/screens/userInfo.xsp
>>> ./flow/prefs/screens/welcome.xsp
>>> ./flow/test/screens/showString.xsp
>>> ./i18n/simple.xsp
>>> ./modules/properties.xsp
>>> ./myapp/xsp/page.xsp
>>> ./protected/docs/protected.xsp
>>> ./simpleform/one/ERROR.xsp
>>> ./simpleform/one/OK.xsp
>>> ./soap/pages/currency.xsp
>>> ./soap/pages/temperature.xsp
>>> ./soap/pages/xscript/getquote1.xsp
>>> ./soap/pages/xscript/getquote2.xsp
>>> ./soap/pages/xscript/getquote3.xsp
>>> ./soap/pages/xscript/simple.xsp
>>> ./soap/pages/xscript/test.xsp
>>> ./sources/content/dynamic.xsp
>>> ./sources/content/simple.xsp
>>> ./sources/style/simple-page2html.xsp
>>>
>>> Off course these changes must also be ported to 2.2.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Interestingly some of these samples (e.g. flow) are ported in 2.2
>> from xsp to jx...
>>
>>
>>
> Yep I already started doing some work in that department :-)
>
BTW. this was done only in the flow samples and regarding me wanting to
test the flow functionality with the componentized processor. I'll take
care of backporting that stuff to 2.1
--
Unico
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Unico Hommes <un...@hippo.nl>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>Unico Hommes wrote:
>
>
>>Awsome, I'm willing to do some stuff as well. I think that
>>besides just moving code around it involves some work
>>regarding quite a few core samples that use XSP. Here's a list:
>>
>>./common/view-source.xsp
>>./flow/calc/screens/displayResult.xsp
>>./flow/calc/screens/getNumberA.xsp
>>./flow/calc/screens/getNumberB.xsp
>>./flow/calc/screens/getOperator.xsp
>>./flow/prefs/screens/login.xsp
>>./flow/prefs/screens/registrationSuccessful.xsp
>>./flow/prefs/screens/userInfo.xsp
>>./flow/prefs/screens/welcome.xsp
>>./flow/test/screens/showString.xsp
>>./i18n/simple.xsp
>>./modules/properties.xsp
>>./myapp/xsp/page.xsp
>>./protected/docs/protected.xsp
>>./simpleform/one/ERROR.xsp
>>./simpleform/one/OK.xsp
>>./soap/pages/currency.xsp
>>./soap/pages/temperature.xsp
>>./soap/pages/xscript/getquote1.xsp
>>./soap/pages/xscript/getquote2.xsp
>>./soap/pages/xscript/getquote3.xsp
>>./soap/pages/xscript/simple.xsp
>>./soap/pages/xscript/test.xsp
>>./sources/content/dynamic.xsp
>>./sources/content/simple.xsp
>>./sources/style/simple-page2html.xsp
>>
>>Off course these changes must also be ported to 2.2.
>>
>>
>>
>Interestingly some of these samples (e.g. flow) are ported in 2.2
>from xsp to jx...
>
>
>
Yep I already started doing some work in that department :-)
--
Unico
RE: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Unico Hommes wrote:
> Awsome, I'm willing to do some stuff as well. I think that
> besides just moving code around it involves some work
> regarding quite a few core samples that use XSP. Here's a list:
>
> ./common/view-source.xsp
> ./flow/calc/screens/displayResult.xsp
> ./flow/calc/screens/getNumberA.xsp
> ./flow/calc/screens/getNumberB.xsp
> ./flow/calc/screens/getOperator.xsp
> ./flow/prefs/screens/login.xsp
> ./flow/prefs/screens/registrationSuccessful.xsp
> ./flow/prefs/screens/userInfo.xsp
> ./flow/prefs/screens/welcome.xsp
> ./flow/test/screens/showString.xsp
> ./i18n/simple.xsp
> ./modules/properties.xsp
> ./myapp/xsp/page.xsp
> ./protected/docs/protected.xsp
> ./simpleform/one/ERROR.xsp
> ./simpleform/one/OK.xsp
> ./soap/pages/currency.xsp
> ./soap/pages/temperature.xsp
> ./soap/pages/xscript/getquote1.xsp
> ./soap/pages/xscript/getquote2.xsp
> ./soap/pages/xscript/getquote3.xsp
> ./soap/pages/xscript/simple.xsp
> ./soap/pages/xscript/test.xsp
> ./sources/content/dynamic.xsp
> ./sources/content/simple.xsp
> ./sources/style/simple-page2html.xsp
>
> Off course these changes must also be ported to 2.2.
>
Interestingly some of these samples (e.g. flow) are ported in 2.2
from xsp to jx...
Carsten
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Unico Hommes <un...@hippo.nl>.
Stephan Michels wrote:
>Am Di, den 09.03.2004 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz um 16:37:
>
>
>>>>We should move XSP in a block anyway.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>+1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard
>>>
>>>
>>+0.5 (=good idea, won't be able to help)
>>
>>
>
>I can offer some help, if nobody on it, then I can try it?!
>
>
>
Awsome, I'm willing to do some stuff as well. I think that besides just
moving code around it involves some work regarding quite a few core
samples that use XSP. Here's a list:
./common/view-source.xsp
./flow/calc/screens/displayResult.xsp
./flow/calc/screens/getNumberA.xsp
./flow/calc/screens/getNumberB.xsp
./flow/calc/screens/getOperator.xsp
./flow/prefs/screens/login.xsp
./flow/prefs/screens/registrationSuccessful.xsp
./flow/prefs/screens/userInfo.xsp
./flow/prefs/screens/welcome.xsp
./flow/test/screens/showString.xsp
./i18n/simple.xsp
./modules/properties.xsp
./myapp/xsp/page.xsp
./protected/docs/protected.xsp
./simpleform/one/ERROR.xsp
./simpleform/one/OK.xsp
./soap/pages/currency.xsp
./soap/pages/temperature.xsp
./soap/pages/xscript/getquote1.xsp
./soap/pages/xscript/getquote2.xsp
./soap/pages/xscript/getquote3.xsp
./soap/pages/xscript/simple.xsp
./soap/pages/xscript/test.xsp
./sources/content/dynamic.xsp
./sources/content/simple.xsp
./sources/style/simple-page2html.xsp
Off course these changes must also be ported to 2.2.
--
Unico
Re: [Summary] [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@reverycodes.com>.
Reinhard Pötz wrote:
> Stephan Michels wrote:
>
>> Am Di, den 09.03.2004 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz um 16:37:
>>
>>
>>>>> We should move XSP in a block anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard
>>>>
>>>
>>> +0.5 (=good idea, won't be able to help)
>>>
>>
>>
>> I can offer some help, if nobody on it, then I can try it?!
>>
>>
> Yes pls, this would be really great! So far we have 10 +1, so move on!
Where python xsp will reside? If it won't move - then python block
depends on xsp block. Alternatively, it can be moved into xsp block itself.
Vadim
Re: [Summary] [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Unico Hommes wrote:
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
>> Torsten Curdt wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Unico Hommes wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I tend to think the dependency is from session-fw on xsp, not the
>>>>> other way around. Unless this becomes really difficult to
>>>
>>> accomplish
>>>
>>>>> I'd prefer keeping it the way it is now. I will do some
>>>
>>> research as to
>>>
>>>>> what would be involved to change the build system to
>>>
>>> accomodate this.
>>>
>>>
>>>> But this then makes removing xsp more difficult :) I really think
>>>> we should keep all xsp related stuff in one place. This makes the
>>>> whole thing easier to handle but also is more transparent for
>>>> users. They have one single place to look for logicsheets.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hm... I think it's hard to classify...
>>>
>>> Do you also want to move the e.g. ESQL logicsheet into
>>> the XSP block? IMO that would not be a good idea.
>>>
>>
>>
>> True...hmm...ok, then whoever does it should decide :)
>>
>>
>>
> I see your point of placing the burden of dependencies with xsp though.
> We could take that as a guideline whenever there isn't a clear reason to
> do otherwise.
I'm starting to realize that XSP is an aspect not a block... maybe we
should have two different concepts?
--
Stefano.
Re: [Summary] [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Unico Hommes <un...@hippo.nl>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>Torsten Curdt wrote:
>
>
>>Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Unico Hommes wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I tend to think the dependency is from session-fw on xsp, not the
>>>>other way around. Unless this becomes really difficult to
>>>>
>>>>
>>accomplish
>>
>>
>>>>I'd prefer keeping it the way it is now. I will do some
>>>>
>>>>
>>research as to
>>
>>
>>>>what would be involved to change the build system to
>>>>
>>>>
>>accomodate this.
>>
>>
>>>But this then makes removing xsp more difficult :) I really think
>>>we should keep all xsp related stuff in one place. This makes the
>>>whole thing easier to handle but also is more transparent for
>>>users. They have one single place to look for logicsheets.
>>>
>>>
>>Hm... I think it's hard to classify...
>>
>>Do you also want to move the e.g. ESQL logicsheet into
>>the XSP block? IMO that would not be a good idea.
>>
>>
>
>True...hmm...ok, then whoever does it should decide :)
>
>
>
I see your point of placing the burden of dependencies with xsp though.
We could take that as a guideline whenever there isn't a clear reason to
do otherwise.
--
Unico
RE: [Summary] [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Torsten Curdt wrote:
>
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> > Unico Hommes wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I tend to think the dependency is from session-fw on xsp, not the
> >>other way around. Unless this becomes really difficult to
> accomplish
> >>I'd prefer keeping it the way it is now. I will do some
> research as to
> >>what would be involved to change the build system to
> accomodate this.
> >>
> >
> > But this then makes removing xsp more difficult :) I really think
> > we should keep all xsp related stuff in one place. This makes the
> > whole thing easier to handle but also is more transparent for
> > users. They have one single place to look for logicsheets.
>
> Hm... I think it's hard to classify...
>
> Do you also want to move the e.g. ESQL logicsheet into
> the XSP block? IMO that would not be a good idea.
True...hmm...ok, then whoever does it should decide :)
Carsten
Re: [Summary] [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> Unico Hommes wrote:
>
>
>>I tend to think the dependency is from session-fw on xsp, not
>>the other way around. Unless this becomes really difficult to
>>accomplish I'd prefer keeping it the way it is now. I will do
>>some research as to what would be involved to change the
>>build system to accomodate this.
>>
>
> But this then makes removing xsp more difficult :) I really think
> we should keep all xsp related stuff in one place. This makes the
> whole thing easier to handle but also is more transparent for
> users. They have one single place to look for logicsheets.
Hm... I think it's hard to classify...
Do you also want to move the e.g. ESQL logicsheet into
the XSP block? IMO that would not be a good idea.
--
Torsten
RE: [Summary] [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Unico Hommes wrote:
> >
> I tend to think the dependency is from session-fw on xsp, not
> the other way around. Unless this becomes really difficult to
> accomplish I'd prefer keeping it the way it is now. I will do
> some research as to what would be involved to change the
> build system to accomodate this.
>
But this then makes removing xsp more difficult :) I really think
we should keep all xsp related stuff in one place. This makes the
whole thing easier to handle but also is more transparent for
users. They have one single place to look for logicsheets.
Carsten
Re: [Summary] [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Unico Hommes <un...@hippo.nl>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>>I have following problem, that
>>>src/blocks/session-fw/conf/xsp-session-fw.xconf
>>>depends on the xsp block, but won't be executed before the
>>>
>>>
>>patch files
>>
>>
>>>of the xsp block :-/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>This may require a change to the build system. Hmm.
>>
>>
>>
>What about moving *all* xsp stuff into the xsp block? Afaik, the
>session and the authentication block have xsp support. But that
>consists only of a logicsheet and perhaps an utility class.
>So, the xsp block would depend perhaps on the session and auth
>block.
>WDYT?
>
>
>
I tend to think the dependency is from session-fw on xsp, not the other
way around. Unless this becomes really difficult to accomplish I'd
prefer keeping it the way it is now. I will do some research as to what
would be involved to change the build system to accomodate this.
--
Unico
RE: [Summary] [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Stephan Michels <st...@apache.org>.
Am Mi, den 10.03.2004 schrieb Carsten Ziegeler um 14:24:
> > >I have following problem, that
> > > src/blocks/session-fw/conf/xsp-session-fw.xconf
> > >depends on the xsp block, but won't be executed before the
> > patch files
> > >of the xsp block :-/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > This may require a change to the build system. Hmm.
> >
> What about moving *all* xsp stuff into the xsp block? Afaik, the
> session and the authentication block have xsp support. But that
> consists only of a logicsheet and perhaps an utility class.
> So, the xsp block would depend perhaps on the session and auth
> block.
> WDYT?
Sounds reasonable. If nobody against it, let do it.
Stephan.
RE: [Summary] [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
> >I have following problem, that
> > src/blocks/session-fw/conf/xsp-session-fw.xconf
> >depends on the xsp block, but won't be executed before the
> patch files
> >of the xsp block :-/
> >
> >
> >
>
> This may require a change to the build system. Hmm.
>
What about moving *all* xsp stuff into the xsp block? Afaik, the
session and the authentication block have xsp support. But that
consists only of a logicsheet and perhaps an utility class.
So, the xsp block would depend perhaps on the session and auth
block.
WDYT?
Carsten
Re: [Summary] [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Unico Hommes <un...@hippo.nl>.
Stephan Michels wrote:
>Am Mi, den 10.03.2004 schrieb Reinhard Pötz um 11:03:
>
>
>>Stephan Michels wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Am Di, den 09.03.2004 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz um 16:37:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>We should move XSP in a block anyway.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>+1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>+0.5 (=good idea, won't be able to help)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I can offer some help, if nobody on it, then I can try it?!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Yes pls, this would be really great! So far we have 10 +1, so move on!
>>
>>
>
>So, the first stage is done. I also saw that you converted the jflow
>examples, great!
>
>I have following problem, that
> src/blocks/session-fw/conf/xsp-session-fw.xconf
>depends on the xsp block, but won't be executed before the
>patch files of the xsp block :-/
>
>
>
This may require a change to the build system. Hmm.
--
Unico
Re: [Summary] [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Stephan Michels <st...@apache.org>.
Am Mi, den 10.03.2004 schrieb Reinhard Pötz um 11:03:
> Stephan Michels wrote:
>
> >Am Di, den 09.03.2004 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz um 16:37:
> >
> >
> >>>>We should move XSP in a block anyway.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>+1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard
> >>>
> >>>
> >>+0.5 (=good idea, won't be able to help)
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I can offer some help, if nobody on it, then I can try it?!
> >
> >
> Yes pls, this would be really great! So far we have 10 +1, so move on!
So, the first stage is done. I also saw that you converted the jflow
examples, great!
I have following problem, that
src/blocks/session-fw/conf/xsp-session-fw.xconf
depends on the xsp block, but won't be executed before the
patch files of the xsp block :-/
Stephan
[Summary] [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Reinhard Pötz <re...@apache.org>.
Stephan Michels wrote:
>Am Di, den 09.03.2004 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz um 16:37:
>
>
>>>>We should move XSP in a block anyway.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>+1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard
>>>
>>>
>>+0.5 (=good idea, won't be able to help)
>>
>>
>
>I can offer some help, if nobody on it, then I can try it?!
>
>
Yes pls, this would be really great! So far we have 10 +1, so move on!
--
Reinhard
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Stephan Michels wrote:
> Am Di, den 09.03.2004 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz um 16:37:
>
>>>>We should move XSP in a block anyway.
>>>
>>>
>>>+1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard
>>
>>+0.5 (=good idea, won't be able to help)
>
>
> I can offer some help, if nobody on it, then I can try it?!
Go right ahead!
--
Stefano.
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Stephan Michels <st...@apache.org>.
Am Di, den 09.03.2004 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz um 16:37:
> >> We should move XSP in a block anyway.
> >
> >
> > +1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard
>
> +0.5 (=good idea, won't be able to help)
I can offer some help, if nobody on it, then I can try it?!
Stephan.
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Tim Larson <ti...@keow.org>.
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 11:20:46AM -0500, Geoff Howard wrote:
> Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
> >
> >>>We should move XSP in a block anyway.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>+1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard
> >
> >
> >+0.5 (=good idea, won't be able to help)
> >
>
> same here,
> Geoff
and same reasoning here, +0.5
--Tim Larson
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Geoff Howard <co...@leverageweb.com>.
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
>>> We should move XSP in a block anyway.
>>
>>
>>
>> +1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard
>
>
> +0.5 (=good idea, won't be able to help)
>
same here,
Geoff
Re: [Vote] Moving XSP into its own block
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
>> We should move XSP in a block anyway.
>
>
> +1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard
+0.5 (=good idea, won't be able to help)
-Bertrand