Re: [Proposal] Move Sources and Modules as top-level Cocoon components

[Nicola Ken Barozzi]

Christian Haul wrote:

On 13.Dec.2002 -- 01:07 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:

Thus, I propose that input modules and sources have heir place in the org.apache.cocoon.* package space, and that are defined in the sitemap alongside other components, like their parents generators and actions.

What's wrong with org.apache.cocoon.components.* ?

These were IIRC originally only components that Cocoon and Cocoon components use to run themselves, not the components that the Cocoon sitemap contains.

IE they are not the building blocks of the sitemap, but external services that Cocoon uses.

[...]

Thus we would have them in blocks; the ones with external dependencies in their own blocks, the others in a single block for each group.

what would prevent this with the current package names ??

It's not the package names per se. If we make them into standard cocoon components, they are handled in blocks like other cocoon components, and can be referenced in sitemaps as such.
Having Cocoon Components (ie Components for which Cocoon is the container) in mixed packages is confusing IMHO, but as you note not a technical issue.

"generators and sources are of the same type in cocoon? Then why are the packages treated differently?"

in addition +1 for sitemap.xconf / components.xconf

Which already reduces the possible names :-)

--
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
            - verba volant, scripta manent -
   (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]