Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > > Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > > Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > > > >> Now I'm a bit lost on the results of the RT deprecated thread 8-) so > >> I'm making this into a proposal. > >> > >> _Proposal_ > >> > >> This proposal is to create a source section parallel to blocks, to > >> hold Cocoon "parts", or "modules", that are not part of the Cocoon > >> minimal core but need nevertheless to be included in the classpath and > >> config files at startup. > >> > >> They would look identical to the current "blocks", ie jars. The > >> difference is that they will never be hot-pluggable as Cocoon > >> Components, and are not part of the Block concept. > >> Thus, when proper .cob blocks will arrive, the /blocks will migrate to > >> that packaging format, while these "modules" will not. > >> > >> Possible candidates to be repackaged as modules: > >> 1 - deprecated classes that are not Cocoon Components > >> 2 - Environment implememtations > >> 3 - "frontends" like CocoonServlet.java and Main.java > >> 4 - samples > >> 5 - module implementations > >> 6 - profiler > >> > >> Many more can be moved, but these are the ones that ATM make more > >> sense to me. > >> > >> We also need a name for these "parts", currently I'm for "modules", > >> but suggestions are welcome. > >> Also module.xml is confusing, since it means CVSmodule... > >> project-info.xml is a proposal, any other or it's ok? > >> > >> Thanks. > >
+1 > > > > I like the concept but I'm afraid of overloading 'module'.... > it's wild, > > but what about > > > > 'organs' > > > > Just like Cocoon is a body and you take and remove organs that are not > > necessary for its life. > > Hmmm, too atristic. After the fancy name overload in Avalon and in some > of my projects, I now start to think that one fancy name per project is > enough ;-) > Yes, please, no fancy names. > But still IMHO Chris is right about the "module" name clashes, and > overmore Apache has them too but they are probably more akin to blocks. > > Guys, you'd better come out with a good name here, or I'll stick to the > ugly one out of necessity! ;-P > Good idea - as a non native speaker I can only think of modules or parts. But I don't have anything better. > > [note: from the list above, I think 'samples' should be a block, not a > > module] > > Looking at the actual code better... I guess you're right. > Yes, samples are more a block or part of a block. Carsten Carsten Ziegeler Open Source Group, S&N AG --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
