cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guido Casper <gcas...@s-und-n.de>
Subject Re: [RT] Use of flowscript or the pyramid of contracts (was Re: [RT] Checked exceptions considered harmful)
Date Mon, 19 Apr 2004 18:38:40 GMT
Tim Olson wrote:
>>>Yes, we habe FOM. The difference to the sitemap is that the sitemap 
>>>enforces the contract while flow doesn't.
>>
>>One drastic approach would be to stop flow from being able to access 
>>java at all, if not thru FOM. I would be in favor of that 
>>once we have 
>>the real block system running, but at that point it might 
>>well be too late.
> 
> 
> we already have a nice system of flow helper methods to access entity beans
> and pump them into XML.  we use flow to select which components are needed
> when, and the contract with our GUI designers is XML.  we were already burnt
> quite badly when sendPage() became a requirement, since we were using flow
> to merely select actions and the sitemap had all of our branching.  we are
> now unable to upgrade past 2.1.2 without major refactoring which honestly we
> can't afford to do.
> you theoreticians seem all too willing to break production systems to
> enforce your latest notion of best practices.

Tim, don't take the word for everything said in a RT thread and don't 
worry that access to Java will be disabled in the 2.x branch (if ever) 
as this certainly would break any production system running on with flow.

Guido

-- 
Guido Casper
-------------------------------------------------
S&N AG, Competence Center Open Source
                     Tel.: +49-5251-1581-87
Klingenderstr. 5    mailto:gcasper@s-und-n.de
D-33100 Paderborn   http://www.s-und-n.de
-------------------------------------------------

Mime
View raw message