cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joerg Heinicke <joerg.heini...@gmx.de>
Subject Re: new blocks.properties way more painful to use
Date Mon, 05 Apr 2004 03:01:54 GMT
On 05.04.2004 04:53, Antonio Gallardo wrote:

>>But the real need for changing it came out of the discussion about
>>default excludes of blocks (e.g. javaflow or all unstable blocks). You
>>have *no* possibility to re-include a block then in
>>local.blocks.properties.
> 
> 
> Yes you have a posibility. I posted, while I developed the OJB block I
> found the way to do that:
> 
> Suppose in block.properties you set: exclude.block.ojb=true
> 
> Then to rewrite the value, you can use in your local.block.properties:
> 
> exclude.block.ojb=false
> 
> and this works.
> 
> It is the "nature" of Ant properties. Once you set it, you cannot change
> it. If I already set it in the local.block.properties, even in the case
> you try to rewrite it in the block.properties you will not success and the
> property remain as it was defined in the local.block.properties block.

Ah, sorry, you are right. I found this out myself, but had it not in 
mind when writing the above:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.text.xml.cocoon.devel/33944

But exactly the "nature" of Ant properties or at least the behaviour 
when using them in @unless and @if (which is independent on their value 
true or false, only set or not set is tested) let me think that the 
above would not work. Only the mapping through 
<condition><istrue/></condition> made this work.

And at the end the vote was even about just changing docu ("use 
true/false for default excluded blocks") or additionally rename the 
properties.

Joerg

Mime
View raw message