Re: [VOTE] avalon's future - take 2 (was [vote] avalon's future )

[Stefano Mazzocchi]

Mircea Toma wrote:

Stepanossov, Kirill wrote:

Committers, if this accepted, could you still leave different "toolkits"

for

building customized containers available ?

Why does everybody here think that COP and inheritance don't mix?

They can mix but not very elegantly.

that's not my perception.

 COP is promoting Composition as the

main design pattern isn't it?

Sure, but nowhere is stated that these components can't follow OOP patterns themselves.

Example: Cocoon will need the embeddable container to implement cocoon
blocks, but cocoon blocks will have features that are cocoon-specific,
so Cocoon will have to "extend" this container to fit its needs.

If you think about blocks in the same way Cocoon extends ECM to provide the
specific functionality then you have a clear case were inheritance is not
doing a very good job.....

Look: cocoon needs user-level application modules. think of them as COP for webapps. No web technology allows that.

Now, either we write our own container or we work with the avalon community to have the functionality we need in place. But *much* of this functional requirements will be cocoon-specific (like a sitemap exposure).

So, tell me, how would you suggest we move on? write *yet another container* because the COP patterns suggest that and we don't want to *pollute* other containers with cocoon-specific stuff?

why can't we take what's there and *extend* it for our needs? what's wrong with that?

--
Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------------



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>