Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Message-ID: <451CC905.7060804@apache.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 09:19:33 +0200
From: Carsten Ziegeler <cziegeler@apache.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: [RT] Simplify flow usage
References: <451BECA3.6060707@apache.org> <451C096A.3060902@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <451C096A.3060902@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>> Is anyone against make using flow a little bit easier in trunk?
>> I really hate to specify all my flow scripts in the sitemap - so what
>> about using some "convention over configuration" stuff and include by
>> default all "*.js" files which are located in the "config/flow"
>> directory (relative to the current sitemap). We already have this
>> behaviour for avalon config files, for spring bean definitions and for
>> properties, so it seems natural to me to extend this to flow scripts as
>> well.
>> And it keeps the sitemap even cleaner.
>>
>> If noone objects I will add the stuff in the next days.
> 
> I like the feature but not the location as flowscripts are not configuration 
> files. What about ./flow only?
> 
Ok, it seems that everyone here is in favour of using just "flow"
without an additional sub directory. I'm fine with that.

Now what about the other directories we currently have:
config/spring, config/xconf and config/properties?
Should we leave them where they are or move them one directory up?

Carsten
-- 
Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG
http://www.s-und-n.de
http://www.osoco.org/weblogs/rael/