cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sylvain Wallez <>
Subject Re: [C2][RT] Component packaging system
Date Tue, 17 Jul 2001 07:24:02 GMT

Sergio Carvalho a écrit :
> Hi,
> Following Berin's habits of publishing seeds for public brainstorming, I'd like
> to hear your feelings about the need for component packaging in C2.
> A look at the evolution of the stock sitemap.xmap reveals a growing number of
> components. This is natural, and is a Good Thing(tm). C2 users are adapting
> C2 to a growing number of demands, and this is one of the paths to do it.
> It is just expectable that, as the user base grows, and C2 API stabilizes, more
> and more C2 components see the daylight.
> I see one problem, though. Currently, all components become part of Cocoon's codebase.
> This somewhat increases C2 complexity for developers, but unquestionably raises
> management problems.
> When it comes to componentized development, I like to think of a CPAN like scenario.
> Among perl's many virtues and defects, one undisputed excellent feature is the
>  component repository. If an architecure has the ability to be extended through
> components, I think it should aim to have its own CPAN: distributed development and
> testing of components, with easy deployment mechanisms and a central component
> registry.
> If C2 ever reached the number of components perl has today, the number of commiters
> would be astonishing, and codebase management (permissions, QA, etc) would be a
> nightmare. Clearly, if the objective is to have a large number of components,
> components should be easily detachable from core cocoon.
> What would a component packaging system require? I guess an existing packaging format
> may be reusable for these needs. A component-contained configuration might be needed.
> Here I don't have a formed opinion, other than thinking component declaration shouldn't
>  be in the sitemap. Please kick in and write back.
> --
> Sergio Carvalho
> ---------------
> If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you

What's really missing is a way for components to formally describe their
configuration. For now, the configuration is sometimes specified
textually in the javadoc and often you have to dig in the code to know
what the component expects. This would allow for verification of
configuration and building user-friendly assembly tools.

Sylvain Wallez
Anyware Technologies -

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, email:

View raw message