cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Giacomo Pati <>
Subject Re: Restructuring directory structure[was [Vote] Block artifact directory structure]
Date Mon, 06 Nov 2006 20:32:14 GMT
Hash: SHA1

Leszek Gawron wrote:
> Giacomo Pati wrote:
>> Hash: SHA1
>> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>> Leszek Gawron wrote:
>>>> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>>>> Sorry, I got totally lost in all these mails. As far as I
>>>>> understand we
>>>>> are currently discussing when/where it's possible to set the
>>>>> running mode.
>>>>> There are two places: applicationContext.xml and system property. The
>>>>> system property takes precedence over the applicationContext.xml. I'm
>>>>> not sure which role cocoon.xconf should play in this?
>>>> I think everyone means applicationContext.xml. I happend to put the
>>>> wrong name in the first place.
>>> :) OK, fine, so is there still a problem?
>> Actually, yes, the problem is still there. If I understand Leszek
>> correctly, we do have to places in code where we examine the running
>> mode with the same algorithm.
> I actually have two problems:
> 1. IMO cocoon components should either use Settings.getRunningMode() to
> get the current running mode or have the mode injected. Allowing
> components to determine the running mode using any algorithm (even the
> easiest one) leads to inconsistencies.

I do absolutely agree with you.

> 2. Some components (like CocoonOverridePropertyConfigurer, which has
> already been fixed) use the Settings object but happily fallback to
> default mode when settings object is not available. The result of such
> situation is that a bean that has been incorrectly dependence injected
> uses other running mode than you might think. Beans using running mode.
> should simply throw if they cannot determine one.

As Carsten pointed out in a recent mail, we do not have the "original
working code" yet in the repo (dunno where it has been gone, nor which
ever class he had in mind as "original working code"). Maybe we should
just restore it and see whether that fix our problems

> I am probably picky about this but hey - you're the ones I've learnt my
> values from :)

Sure, it's easy to have someone to blame for it ;-)


- --
Giacomo Pati
Otego AG, Switzerland -
Orixo, the XML business alliance -

Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)


View raw message