cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Niclas Hedhman <>
Subject Re: [RT] Flow as a block
Date Sat, 15 Mar 2003 10:01:26 GMT
On Saturday 15 March 2003 17:37, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Niclas Hedhman wrote, On 15/03/2003 9.25:
> > On Friday 14 March 2003 22:01, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> >>Stefano Mazzocchi wrote, On 14/03/2003 14.49:
> >>>But I would like to be able to build cocoon without them and prevent
> >>>people with the ability to use them to solve their problems. Just like
> >>>Carsten wants to do with the flow or XSP.
> >>
> >>That's not the reason IIUC.
> >>Flow adds new dependencies to Cocoon as jars, actions do not. What is
> >>the technical reason why actions have to be able to be removed?
> >>
> >>If you don't want to use them, don't. Since people will be able to
> >>compile with the support in, they will do so, and you will not prevent
> >>them to use actions (nor ATM it's desireable).
> >
> > Well, if you become a Cocoon hosting service, you may have a different
> > opinion of what other people can do in their sitemaps.
> Good point... if only removing actions would be a solution. If I were a
> Cocoon hosting service, I would want complete control on all the
> components that users can use, but that has nothing to do with Actions
> per se IIUC, but about the implementations of Cocoon components and the
> possibility of using them.
> Any suggestion on what you would want to have to create your costomized
> version of Cocoon given the above point?

Well, I am not in that position, just came yo think about the possibility...
OTOH, a lot can be solved with Java codebase security as well, so....???


View raw message