cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <nicola...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] make Cocoon modules alongside blocks (was Re: [RT] A deprecated module )
Date Thu, 05 Dec 2002 00:15:16 GMT

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> 
>> Now I'm a bit lost on the results of the RT deprecated thread 8-) so 
>> I'm making this into a proposal.
>>
>> _Proposal_
>>
>> This proposal is to create a source section parallel to blocks, to 
>> hold Cocoon "parts", or "modules", that are not part of the Cocoon 
>> minimal core but need nevertheless to be included in the classpath and 
>> config files at startup.
>>
>> They would look identical to the current "blocks", ie jars. The 
>> difference is that they will never be hot-pluggable as Cocoon 
>> Components, and are not part of the Block concept.
>> Thus, when proper .cob blocks will arrive, the /blocks will migrate to 
>> that packaging format, while these "modules" will not.
>>
>> Possible candidates to be repackaged as modules:
>>  1 - deprecated classes that are not Cocoon Components
>>  2 - Environment implememtations
>>  3 - "frontends" like CocoonServlet.java and Main.java
>>  4 - samples
>>  5 - module implementations
>>  6 - profiler
>>
>> Many more can be moved, but these are the ones that ATM make more 
>> sense to me.
>>
>> We also need a name for these "parts", currently I'm for "modules", 
>> but suggestions are welcome.
>> Also module.xml is confusing, since it means CVSmodule... 
>> project-info.xml is a proposal, any other or it's ok?
>>
>> Thanks.
> 
> 
> I like the concept but I'm afraid of overloading 'module'.... it's wild, 
> but what about
> 
>  'organs'
> 
> Just like Cocoon is a body and you take and remove organs that are not 
> necessary for its life.

Hmmm, too atristic. After the fancy name overload in Avalon and in some 
of my projects, I now start to think that one fancy name per project is 
enough ;-)

But still IMHO Chris is right about the "module" name clashes, and 
overmore Apache has them too but they are probably more akin to blocks.

Guys, you'd better come out with a good name here, or I'll stick to the 
ugly one out of necessity! ;-P

> [note: from the list above, I think 'samples' should be a block, not a 
> module]

Looking at the actual code better... I guess you're right.

-- 
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