forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <rgard...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Docbook as forrest-plugin
Date Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:39:16 GMT
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Dave Brondsema wrote:
> 
>> Quoting Ross Gardler <rgardler@apache.org>:
> 
> ...
> 
>>> I think we have slightly different long term views of what may become 
>>> a plugin. Here are a few examples of possible plugins that are not 
>>> "content type classes":
>>>
>>> - Lenya Plugin
>>> - Jetty launching code
>>> - Tomcat launching code
>>> - auto-deployment to a running Servlet engine
>>
>>
>> Would we call these plugins at all?  They seem to me to be part of our 
>> build
>> process, possibly using forrestbot.
> 
> 
> I agree, they are not plugins in a strict sense...
> 
> Let's take as an example the inclusion of the last 3 commit logs of a 
> file in the file itself, as described in FOR-237 [1].
> 
> The 'includelog' plugin would necessarily have to take part in the build 
> process, as it has to pregenerate some content before the actual 
> Forrest-Cocoon engine start.
> 
> This same functionality can be used to add targets to the Forrest build, 
> like highlighted above. For example we could factor the Jetty stuff in 
> it's own plugin, as the code to do it will be there.
> 
> Note that could!=should.
> 
> As for should, I tend to agree that we should not do so, at least for 
> now, as these are part of the forrest *commands* (run, validate, etc), 
> and not an extension to these.
> 
> 
> [1] http://issues.cocoondev.org/browse/FOR-327
> 

As you say could != should. If this is going to cloud things are this 
time then we should leave it be for now. I was simply illustrating where 
it *should* go and seem to have opened a whole new can of worms with my 
early morning thought processes.

We can revisit if this (or similar) becomes a desired course of action.

Ross

Mime
View raw message