cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <nicola...@apache.org>
Subject HackBlock refactor update: is this ok?
Date Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:26:51 GMT
I've decided to call the "modules" blocks, since many *are* blocks.
Fop, Batik, etc are all blocks.
For now they are HackBlocks ;-) because they don't yet have a final 
descriptor.

The flowmap IMNSHO is not, so for now I'll leave it where it is.

Now, I have done some experimentations with the dirs and the files.

Example of the Fop block:
  xml-cocoon2/src/blocks/java/org/apache/cocoon/serialization/FopSerializer
xml-cocoon2/src/blocks/conf/fop.xmap

in the Gump descriptor, which I want to move to Cocoon CVS, there is an 
entry for each block, stating dependencies in forms of jars and other 
blocks.
There is a property file that says if a block should be compiled.

Ant generates a build file that resolves the dependencies, builds the 
blocks one by one, and adds the xmap with the ant tool to the webapp.

The samples in this way are still in webapp, and also the documentation.

What do you think?

Anything wrong? Anything missing?

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org


Mime
View raw message