Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 78048 invoked from network); 16 Feb 2005 11:56:38 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 16 Feb 2005 11:56:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 5237 invoked by uid 500); 16 Feb 2005 11:56:35 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 5028 invoked by uid 500); 16 Feb 2005 11:56:34 -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 5014 invoked by uid 99); 16 Feb 2005 11:56:34 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from Unknown (HELO f1.bali.ac) (211.24.132.29) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Feb 2005 03:56:33 -0800 Received: from [192.168.0.129] ([202.187.40.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by f1.bali.ac (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j1GC1KVp026910 for ; Wed, 16 Feb 2005 20:01:26 +0800 From: Niclas Hedhman To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Subject: Re: [RT] How scripting made me hate java Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 19:55:36 +0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1 References: <421079EF.7080204@apache.org> <200502161159.17967.niclas@hedhman.org> <4212F935.50301@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <4212F935.50301@apache.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200502161955.37038.niclas@hedhman.org> X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Wednesday 16 February 2005 15:41, Reinhard Poetz wrote: > Niclas Hedhman wrote: > > Why not use SVN's more exotic features of external linking, and plainly > > include the Excalibur codebase (source that is) as part of Cocoon? You > > all have commit access to it, and it is not likely that the Excalibur > > community will make any big changes in the future, and unlikely to object > > to any changes made from Cocoon committers. > > Are you referring to the svn:external property? Yes. > Would it be a problem that > we have to include using https and not http? I don't think so, since it is still the same repository with the same authentication, so I can't see how it could possibly matter. Also, I think, Fitz et al have thought about all that and sorted it out. Never tried it though. Cheers Niclas