Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <4314690A.50504@reverycodes.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 10:11:22 -0400
From: Vadim Gritsenko <vadim@reverycodes.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: [2.2] Past, present and future of the maven build
References: <431451AF.1020206@apache.org> <431454AC.5060000@reverycodes.com>
 <431456D2.6010708@apache.org> <43146075.1050601@reverycodes.com>
 <43146397.2090509@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <43146397.2090509@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> 
>> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> 
>>> Ok, then:
>>>     + core-blocks - cforms
>>>                   - cauth
>>>                   - ctemplate
>>>
>>> :)
>>
>> Hehehe :-)
>>
>> Problem is last attempt at categorizing blocks was a failure; and 
>> conclusion was to have a flat blocks hierarchy: no core blocks, no 
>> 'non-core' blocks, etc. Block is a block is a block.
>>
>> The only difference might be in documentation:
>>
>>   "We are generally recommending to include forms, template block in
>>    all of your projects."
> 
> another difference might be that we can have a "cocoon-standard" 
> distribution that contains the Core and the most important blocks like 
> cForms, cTemplate and cAuth.

+1 to that.

Vadim