cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Savory <and...@luminas.co.uk>
Subject Re: Archetypes, blocks, webapps ...
Date Tue, 17 Apr 2007 09:58:43 GMT
Hi,

On 16 Apr 2007, at 20:17, Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:

> Apparently, it's different, webapp is used to... assembly a webapp,  
> run a webapp etc. However, in C2.2 every Cocoon webapp consists of set
> of blocks. Webapp gives you infrastructure to assembly your blocks  
> into WAR file, it also gives you infrastructure to run (with help of
> jetty) your application.

Right ... in which case, wouldn't it make sense to have an archetype  
for 'simple' applications, that effectively calls the webapp and  
block archetypes? It seems like there's currently a *lot* of work to  
do even for creating a simple publishing site, with no custom code.

>> There's no sitemap, and on jetty startup there's errors like  
>> "Could not
>> instantiate listener
>> org.springframework.web.context.ContextLoaderListener". Only the  
>> block
>> archetype contains the necessary stuff to run - and so I have to  
>> create
>> a block as well.
>
> That's right. Thinking about it further, I wonder if we could  
> provide more meaningful message that webapp is empty so it cannot  
> do any thing
> useful and one has to create block and start hacking there?

That would be very good.

> I think that webapp archetype should not be extended in any way.  
> All we have to do is to say user's that application's code should  
> be put in
> one or more blocks. See also: http://cocoon.zones.apache.org/daisy/ 
> cdocs-site-main/g2/1159.html

But blocks still seem kinda heavyweight to me, if all I want is XML,  
XSLT, sitemap ....


Thanks,

Andrew.
--
Andrew Savory, Managing Director, Sourcesense UK
Tel: +44 (0)870 741 6658  Fax: +44 (0)700 598 1135
Web: http://www.sourcesense.com/



Mime
View raw message