Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 92127 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2007 14:45:20 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Mar 2007 14:45:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 87342 invoked by uid 500); 30 Mar 2007 14:45:25 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 87276 invoked by uid 500); 30 Mar 2007 14:45:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 87264 invoked by uid 99); 30 Mar 2007 14:45:24 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:45:24 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [216.86.168.178] (HELO mxout-03.mxes.net) (216.86.168.178) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:45:16 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.4] (unknown [87.206.142.101]) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 952CA5191A for ; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 10:44:55 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <460D2265.3060708@apache.org> Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 16:44:53 +0200 From: Grzegorz Kossakowski User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20060911) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Subject: Re: Make status code attribute of seriailzers expandable References: <460CFDEF.3000000@apache.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Peter Hunsberger napisa�(a): > On 3/30/07, Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote: > > The classic response has always been that dynamic conditional > pipelines have no place in Cocooon and that if you need them you are > looking at the problem incorrectly. Hmmm... Maybe you are right. Let's forget about this and focus on real problems. > > Isn't the real problem here that you can't pass header info up from > the sub-pipeline? We've talked about other reasons why this may need > to be fixed (not my Validation example! ;-p), this sounds like a > concrete use case that supports the need to fix it? Yes. That's the real problem, but as I've said previously, I do not think that we need to "fix" anything regarding internal requests and just focus on new paradigm in servlet services. -- Grzegorz Kossakowski http://reflectingonthevicissitudes.wordpress.com/