cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Unico Hommes" <Un...@hippo.nl>
Subject RE: [VOTE] rollback Cocoon 2.2 and do Fortress merge later (was Re: Fortress Conversion Stalled)
Date Mon, 03 Nov 2003 17:30:40 GMT
 

Berin Loritsch wrote:
> 
> Unico Hommes wrote:
> 
> > - Recomposable / Reconfigurable interfaces: no solution yet, needs 
> > refactoring.
> 
> We need to make these unneeded.
> 
> > - Support for current sitemap syntax instead of Fortress shorthand 
> > syntax (?)
> 
> Easy enough to do.  All you need to do is override the 
> configure() method and create addComponent() calls with the 
> appropriate meta-info.
> 

DefaultContainer.configure(), AbstractContainer.addComponent(),
ComponentHandlerMetaData()

No problem.

> > - SourceResolver: several options on the table.
> > - ... ?
> 
> The biggest thing is the TreeBuilder--I can't tell you 
> everything that would need to change, but the more hands in 
> that thing, the better for Cocoon in general.  Before it 
> "just worked" so there was no reason to get involved.  
> However, now there are some things that need to change, so 
> maybe we could see some improvements to its design, I dunno.
> 

OK. I am going to look at this and see if I can come up with some
appropriate questions.

> > 
> > 
> >>* Make the Main class work with the new bean.
> >>* Get rid of the old bean.
> > 
> > 
> > This should be straightforward?
> 
> Should be.
> 
> > 
> >>I have no more time, and the TreeBuilder is very tightly integrated.
> >>
> >>I think I have done the hard stuff OK (the support for Request 
> >>Lifestyle and company).
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > Then it would be even more of a let down if we let this go.
> 
> I will lend any guidance I can and answer any questions you have.
> 

Great, thanks for all the work you have put into this already. I'd hate
it if we had to throw all that away.

-- Unico

Mime
View raw message