Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
From: "Carsten Ziegeler" <cziegeler@s-und-n.de>
To: <cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org>
Subject: RE: Replace xpatch with xmltask? (Was Re: xconf tool,
 entity  resolver, and new build options)
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 10:15:11 +0200
Message-ID: <LKENJPKDAIKAPKHEOCMMKEALDLAA.cziegeler@s-und-n.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030522130404.02971818@leverageweb.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"

Geoff Howard wrote:
> 
> At 12:54 PM 5/22/2003, I wrote:
> >>and to make it worse, Bruno just points me to this: 
> >>http://www.oopsconsultancy.com/software/xmltask.html
> >>(license compatible)
> >
> >I'm assuming that was considered before xpatch was created and there
> >was some valid reason it wouldn't work for us.  Could anyone with
> >more info elaborate?  Still, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".
> 
> Just had a better look, and xmltask does look good. The one thing
> that is missing is an "unless" type mechanism, though it's not clear
> if it's needed.
> 
> I'd be interested in other opinions about this.  xmltask is Apache
> license (that's compatible right? ;) )  Why bother continuing to
> brew our own when a good one exists?
> 
I think when we started we were simply not aware of xmltask that's
why we did our own version. And another reason is the "unless"
mechanism which is important for us. Otherwise, if you more than
one build, the task will insert the same fragment twice into your
sitemap or xconf and then nothing works.
afaik this is currently not possible with xmltask.

Carsten