Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 24841 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2004 10:57:13 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 16 Apr 2004 10:57:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 70847 invoked by uid 500); 16 Apr 2004 10:57:08 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 70812 invoked by uid 500); 16 Apr 2004 10:57:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 70788 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2004 10:57:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.s-und-n.de) (212.8.217.2) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 16 Apr 2004 10:57:07 -0000 Received: from notes.sundn.de (ntsrv5.sundn.de [10.10.2.10]) by mail.s-und-n.de (postfix) with ESMTP id 7D4FF19F61F for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 12:57:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hw0386 ([10.10.2.54]) by notes.sundn.de (Lotus Domino Release 6.5) with ESMTP id 2004041612500975-61418 ; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 12:50:09 +0200 From: "Carsten Ziegeler" To: Subject: RE: CocoonComponentManager Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 12:59:32 +0200 Organization: S&N AG MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 In-Reply-To: <006201c4239f$81caa490$0801a8c0@lagrange> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Thread-Index: AcQjnpvdI8FekouoTh+3C7SYRJlijwAAtYZw X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on PBSN1/Systeme und Netzwerke(Release 6.5|September 26, 2003) at 16.04.2004 12:50:09, Serialize by Router on PBSN1/Systeme und Netzwerke(Release 6.5|September 26, 2003) at 16.04.2004 12:50:10, Serialize complete at 16.04.2004 12:50:10 Message-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Leo Sutic wrote: > > > From: Carsten Ziegeler [mailto:cziegeler@s-und-n.de] > > > > This would give everyone access to the info (ok, the current static > > methods are accessible as well) and imho makes it more visible. > > I think it'd make it less visible. For example, you can pass > the CocoonContext only to specific components, while the > statics are available everywhere. > > > Just curious, why do want to do this? Do you just want to use the > > TreeProcessor as a processor for a custom XML? Or are you using the > > TreeProcessor to process a sitemap in a different > environment? Now, I > > think, if the TreeProcessor is used for custom XML, then > you could use > > the TreeBuilder I think (I'm not that sure). If you want to > process a > > sitemap, you need the dependency to the cocoon stuff anyway. > > I will process a reduced sitemap. Just generators, actions, > transformers and serializers. Nothing more. In theory I could > define my own pipeline language, write my own components, and > so on, but I figured I'd try to re-use as much of Cocoon as possible. > > Specifically, I will not be using flow, continuations or subsitemaps. > Thanks for the info. Hmm, there are several places - not just the TreeProcessor - that use these static methods, so this would require more changes then just these two places. On the other hand I see your need. Now, I personally think, if we change this, we should first use the improved code from the 2.2 base as it has less static methods and is in some respects cleaner and then see what we can do with the remaining stuff. But that's just my opinion. Carsten