cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Fagerstrom <dani...@nada.kth.se>
Subject Re: [RT] Micro kernel based Cocoon
Date Tue, 24 May 2005 19:29:09 GMT
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
> 
>> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>>> On that point, I proposed to write a new implementation of the 
>>> flowscript implementation. This is certainly not a total rewrite, but 
>>> a refactoring of the existing code to have an overally consistent 
>>> object model, and also introduce a "flow" object that would separate 
>>> the flow-specific operations out of the "cocoon" object that should 
>>> be the common base for the object model, and therefore be identical 
>>> in all places (flow, templates, form event listeners, etc).
>>
>> Would be nice!
>>
>> Having thought a little bit more about it I think that we, for the 
>> moment, just should make JXTG compatible with flow and independent of 
>> it. I take care of that if not anyone else feel like doing it. Then we 
>> can discuss refactorings, deprecation of confusing behaviour etc. But 
>> we need to support the behaviour of JXTG from 2.1 in 2.2 even if we 
>> hopefully can deprecate some stuff.
> 
> Agree. IIRC, we also talked to have a new CTemplate generator, which 
> could actually be the next-generation JXTG, working consistently with 
> the refactored flow engine. Both being new components could concentrate 
> on overall consistency without caring about backwards compatibility, 
> whereas the existing classes whould have to ensure this compatibility.

Exactly! We had some discussion about what CForms should contain in 
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=110942300500004&r=1&w=2. It should IMO 
also contain the converters that we discussed half a year ago 
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=109941988300003&r=1&w=2.

/Daniel

Mime
View raw message