cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gianugo Rabellino <>
Subject Re: Linotype
Date Sun, 28 Mar 2004 18:08:06 GMT
Ugo Cei wrote:

> Torsten Curdt wrote:
>> In general I agree but it makes the deployment more
>> complicated because the authentication differs from
>> container to container.
> The container-specific part of the configuration varies, but it's 
> usually not that complicated. And everyone who has ever deployed a J2EE 
> webapp should know it well.
> Anyway, the current implementation of authentication in Linotype is a 
> toy, so you'd have to rewrite it for a realistic deployment, and whoever 
> wants to deploy Linotype using a different user repository, LDAP for 
> example, or support single sign-on, would have to rewrite it once again.
> J2EE has a standardized, declaratively specified, authentication 
> mechanism for web apps, that is good enough for Linotype and most apps. 
> Why reinvent it?

Totally agree, in general Container Managed Security is the most 
portable ever. However, it's also true that for demo purposes and quick, 
personal, installation it might be overkill to configure realms and 
web.xml for that (I'm doing it however, for the record).

>> But wouldn't this limit us to the particular "features"/stuctur of that
>> markup. (Well, except using a different namespace) And what is the
>> benefit? We could save a transformation.
> Atom (and I think also RSS 2.0) can be extended with elements from other 
> namespaces, indeed. And we could also ask for changes to the Atom spec, 
> since it's still in draft stage. Anyway, what do you suggest that we use 
> as an alternative?

I'm a bit skeptical that a syndication format is able to comfortably 
include every possible repository issue that a blog has (think 
comments). But I'm open to be proven wrong.


Gianugo Rabellino
Pro-netics s.r.l. -
Orixo, the XML business alliance -
     (Blogging at:

View raw message