Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: repository block (was Re: [RT] Source extensions)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 21:39:08 +0200
Message-ID: <84F0A43A4248CE45B5C0E20F4C40779C6142@naomi.webworks.nl>
Thread-Topic: repository block (was Re: [RT] Source extensions)
Thread-Index: AcOYBL7gvVNd1iirQIygTTRKmK9eugAA2DYQ
From: "Unico Hommes" <Unico@hippo.nl>
To: <dev@cocoon.apache.org>


Guido Casper wrote:
>=20
> I would like to make the following changes to the 2.1 repo and will go
> ahead if noone objects (as soon I find some time):
>=20
> -Creating a repository block and moving there all source interfaces
not
> part of excalibur's sourceresolve package.

+1

> -Moving there the SourceInspector interface and implementations

Yep.

> -Adding a setSourceProperty() method to the SourceInspector interface

Already have it on my local copy. :-)

> -Marking the slide block as unstable

That would be because the slide block then depends on repository block
and inherits its unstable state.

> -Moving there Linotypes repository abstraction(s)
>=20
> So the repository block would currently be not much more than a single
> place to better be able compare/comment/improve/unify/consolidate.
>=20
> This would remove the dependency of the webdav block and the
scratchpad
> block on the slide block but make them all (including Linotype) depend
> on the repository block.
>=20

You could also move TraversableSourceDescriptionGenerator into the
repository block. It's a pair with the source extension interfaces and
doing so would remove the dependency of the scratchpad block on the
repository block.

I am currently working on a simple JdbcSourceInspector for mutable
SourceProperties and a RepositorySource that acts as a Source wrapper
and adds Inspectability.

-- Unico

> Guido
>=20
>=20
> Unico Hommes <Unico@hippo.nl> wrote:
> > Guido Casper wrote:
> >> Unico Hommes <Unico@hippo.nl> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> One of the things I've noticed that I would like to discuss is
that
> >>> the Source extensions such as LockableSource, InspectableSource,
> >>> etc. are currently all located inside the Slide block, whereas
they
> >>> should probably be located in a more general block (a repository
> >>> block?) or else move them to excalibur sourceresolve.
> >>
> >> I thought about that as well. The problem is that some of them do
not
> >> seem general enough to move to excalibur. I'm +1 for a separate
block
> >> although I'm not sure about the name.
> >>
> >
> > Yes, a separate block seems more obvious to me too, at least for
some
> > of the functionality. Property management may be general enough for
> > Excalibur imho.