Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > Berin Loritsch wrote: > >>Coming to a theater near you, Cocoon 2.1: Same Plot, Different Story! > > > Oh, I love it, love it, love it. :) > > Now, let's get nasty! how about XSLT-transforming the sitemap into Jon > Bosak Play DTD :)
I'm not familiar with Jon Bosak :( > > A sidenote: I'm pretty sure that everybody was laughing so loud that all > your points about refactorization was not really taken seriouly. Probably, but it was an example of analyzing Cocoon with the "Play" analogy that I was introduced to in Avalon. > > But I think Berin touches a few serious design issues > (overcomponentization, role of cache control, component isolation) that > we must seriously consider. Those are the biggest beefs I have with Cocoon right now. In my view of the world, the existences of a Cache should be invisible to the anybody who is not specifically tuning it. We should notice its existence solely by the virtue of our page loads being faster. The Overcomponentization is a big problem. Unless we start keeping an eye on it now, we will *never* get around to fixing it. > > I only think that if we do this for 2.1 it will take forever for us to > reach a final release... this is the reason why I was considering > componentization refactoring to happen for 2.2 at least. > > What do you think? > I'm not saying we should go through and implement the COcoon Application COmponentarchitecture now. I am saying we need to quell any further unnecessary componentization as we are now busting at the seams. What I would like to see is that all _optional_ components be broken out into little "mini" projects with their associated classes all in one place. Kind of like what we recently did with Excalibur. In fact, when we finally get the bugs worked out of the dependancy system, I'm sure you can adopt the recursive dependancy build system in Excalibur for the Cocoon components. That way, the _only_ thing in the cocoon.jar is the core essential Cocoon components. All things optional are in separate jars so that we can create an install that is minimalist. Another thing that it allows us to do is start considering the role of the sitemap in regards to dynamic loading of jars. We currently let the servlet engine load all jars associated with a webapp. If we want true pluggability, we need to let subsitemaps load their own set of jars so that we can have true component isolation. Also, so that when we come up with the formal Cocoon Application ComponenT Infrastructure (CACTI?) or whatever we call it, we also have the component loading infrastructure in place. I don't think that is unreasonable. It is a good first step toward the componentization process, allowing us to attack one aspect of it and provide some real feedback before we add in the application component infrastructure. -- "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]