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] Continuation in objectModel, Was: Discussion of Flow Issues
Date Mon, 17 Mar 2003 20:02:38 GMT

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote, On 17/03/2003 20.31:
> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> 
...
>> The only thing which is missing is flow continuation and bean (new 
>> kids), but these are provided by jpath logicsheet. And I can't built 
>> them into core XSP because people want to separate flow into the block.
> 
> Between a hack-based flow implementation driven by the need to factor 
> flow out and a clean flow implementation with no possibility to factor 
> it out, I would vote for the second.

But in the above case in the worst scenario we would have that XSPs 
depend on the flow module being present.

> If the flow, in order to fit nicely in the cocoon picture, needs to 
> accomodate changes in the internal architecture, it meanst that is 
> should not be optional.
> 
> on the other hand, if we can find an elegant solution to keep them 
> separate I'm all for it, but elegant integration is, IMO, more important 
> than potential separation.

+1

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


Mime
View raw message