cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <>
Subject Re: sitemap, jx and flow design (was: servicemanager and jxtg)
Date Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:11:11 GMT
Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>> Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
>>>> <generate type="jx" src="..">
>>>>  <parameter name="userprofile" dom="{cocoon:/userprofile}"/>
>>>> ...
>>>> </generate>
>>> You could do it from a flowscript, whats the problem with that?
>> Wait. You can do a lot of things with flow, but I also think that we 
>> should not forget about what we already have.
>> The sitemap already contains input modules and as much as I was not 
>> thrilled by them, I came to agree that sometimes they are very useful, 
>> because while flow is great for stateful content, using it for 
>> stateless dispatching looks really like a waste and I think we are 
>> pushing flow so much that people will start to abuse it as a 
>> procedural dispatch mechanism.
>> What you are asking and what √Čric is asking are two different things: 
>> he is asking to allow better integration between sitemap and data 
>> generation and you are telling him that "thou shall use flow".
> Seem to me like we have switched opinion with each other ;)
> You know, over the last few years I have written tons of RTs describing 
> more or less cool pipeline constructions for simplifying webapp 
> development. And you have after more or less convincing argumentation 
> stated: "thou shall use flow" and concluded with your obligatory -1.
> My current interest is polishing the basic building blocks for building 
> webapps: JXTG, flow, CForms and maybe some more stuff so that it becomes 
> as coherent and "smooth" as possible and in some cases less monolithic.
> Having such a gool I am more interested in seeing the usual "I don't 
> want to use flow because of X" for something that seem close to the 
> concern area for flow, as a good reason for discussing how to polish 
> flow so that it fullfills its task better.
> Maybe handling data types other than strings; DOM, Java Beans, SQL 
> rowsets etc in the sitemap is an excelent idea. But my gut feeling, 
> after having spend considerable time thinking about building webapps 
> with sitemap constructions, is that it doesn't stop there, we need some 
> other sitemap constructions to make it really useful. And as said I feel 
> more for polishing the flowscript way, than being part of developing 
> alternative solutions. But you don't need my blessing for discussing and 
> developing such things if you feel a need for it.

My girlfriend tells me that sometimes it seems like I argue for the sake 
of arguing.., that I would take the other side no matter what... and 
that in a single conversation I might argue about why something is black 
and then argue about the same thing is white once I change the other 
person's opinion.

I know I do that... and the reason why I do that is that I force people 
to convince themselves before convincing me. There is no such thing as 
being right or wrong.... especially if we don't understand what we 
really want in the first place.

I think that as long as cocoon grows incrementally and organically, 
there is no problem in any approach and that usage will tell us if 
something was a good idea or a bad one.

So, to cut it short: it really doesn't matter what you are saying but 
*how much you are willing to suffer to get it across* :-)

More than anything, I act as a filter. A pain in your butt. I play death 
in a design chess game... where the community is what wins.

So, it doesn't really matter what you do or propose, but how and how 
open is your mind when you do that. The sofware result will be shaped by 
reality and usage anyway, and it will never be perfect because 
perfection is never in living things (and open developped software is a 
living organism) if not in their own existance.


View raw message