cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Glen Ezkovich <g...@hard-bop.com>
Subject Re: Java components in blocks
Date Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:55:22 GMT

On Apr 22, 2005, at 8:34 AM, Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
>
> Pier allready have problems with this, that is one reason for his 
> interest in this area. I have also have had problems with it from time 
> to time.

I have as well.

>
> So, I don't want to left it as a desicion to the blocks developers as 
> it just don't scale. What Pier and I have suggested might be somewhat 
> less powerfull, (but that is left to see), but it does scale. I don't 
> want us to start with a contract with blocks developers that we have 
> to restrict later, it is better to do it the other way around.

I basically agree. On the other hand, I'm not sure this is a 
preventable problem. Once you have two or more apps depending on a 
single jar, you have a choice of either to deploy multiple copies or to 
put the jar in a central location.

>>
>> How so? What is the alternative? Have blocks that have no component 
>> dependencies? If a block depends on a component it depends on a 
>> component. If a sitemap uses a component it uses a component.
>
> Of course a block should be allowed to depend on and contain 
> components, no one have said anything else. The discussion is about if 
> a block should be able to expose any type of component to other 
> blocks.
>

Maybe, I didn't express myself well. This is what I think is a 
non-issue. I think it is a mistake to make it the block manager's 
responsibility to do this simply because of the way Java works.

> I understand that you want two deployment levels. I don't want a 
> global unshielded level as I'm certain that it doesn't scale.

You're right it doesn't. Personally,I would prefer just a single level, 
but I get enough complaints about multiple copies of jars that I think 
some alternative is necessary. The multiple dependencies of blocks 
gives us few if any alternatives.

>
>> Initially, to have the choice of deploying Cocoon wide or sitemap 
>> wide solves some basic issues. The ultimate solution is much more 
>> difficult because of the multiple dependencies a block may have. It 
>> may be that it is impossible to solve all possible scenarios. I don't 
>> know.
>
> I think it would be possible to solve, but personally I don't find it 
> worthwhile right now.

OK. Your point is well taken, If I can find the time I will see what I 
can do. Lets just see what happens. I'm sure in the end all will be 
fine.


Glen Ezkovich
HardBop Consulting
glen at hard-bop.com



A Proverb for Paranoids:
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to 
worry about answers."
- Thomas Pynchon Gravity's Rainbow


Mime
View raw message