Reinhard Poetz wrote: > > > From: Carsten Ziegeler > > > > Reinhard Poetz wrote: > > > > > > > PS Speaking of which, can somebody enlighten me as to why the > > > > CastorTransformer still is part of the scratchpad > > > > block. And what would it take to move it to its separate block ? > > > > > > I remember we already discussed this before 2.1 was released and we > > > said that we didn't want a block so short before the release. > > > > > > Secondly, the new portal stuff uses Castor too and the two > > approaches > > > should be unified. Carsten, do you have any suggestions (I think it > > > was you who suggested this). > > > > > Hmm, I'm not sure if I suggested this...weak memory. > > But the portal uses a persistence component (persistent the > > portal profile in an xml doc and vice versa) and this > > component uses Castor. This is a general component which > > perhaps could be used from the > > transformer? > > Yep, I think this is what you've proposed. > > So we can put the complete castor stuff into a new 'castor' block, > containing the transformer and the "persistence component" and maybe a > generator. The new portal block will then depend on this castor block. > Is this okay for you? > Yes.
Carsten
