"Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
>> This is great!
>>
>> We've been talking about doing this for a while now, so your patch is
>> more than welcome!
>>
>> I haven't had a chance to test it yet (and most likely I won't have one
>> this week), but it's looking great. It would be great if you could add a
>> small Anteater test to test the functionality.
>>
>> One small observation (even though I hate naming discussions ;) I'd
>> rename 'subrequest' to 'process' since is actually a verb and conveys
>> the meaning of the method. You may also want to add it to the
>> Interpreter interface, in case other flow interpreters come up (Scheme
>> etc.)
>
> What about 'callPipeline'?
callPipeline is something that (in my mind) calls a pipeline instance, but
you should already have that pipeline... In this case, you're calling a URI
in the Cocoon sitemap, so IMVHO, "process" makes more sense, but I'm
positive on anything ("callSitemap" would make sense as well)...
I'll start putting it in CVS as "process", we can always change it, deal?
Pier (who has the tendency to loose stuff not checked in)
