Geoff Howard wrote: > > > Unico Hommes wrote: > > ... > > >>>The thing is that Ant 1.6 as promissing as it sounds is not > >>>released yet. If we keep the same build system, thats fine. > >>>However, I would prefer we do this with something we can > >>>expect to find *installed* on a developer's machine. > >> > >>Cocoon comes with its own Ant - there's no need for an > >>installed Ant on > >>the developer's machine. So if we decide to use Ant 1.6 the > user will > >>get it automatically. > > > > But that only covers sources located inside the cocoon > source tree. What about developers that want to create their > own blocks? As it is now the only way to do that is to put > them into the cocoon source tree, edit the Gump descriptor, > etc. How would you achieve that these third party blocks to > be project managed in any acceptable way - such as putting > them into some CVS module of their own or at least away from > the cocoon source tree - ? Somehow there needs to be some > kind of plugin or ant add-on that will also work without > having to invoke cocoons specific build script. Or maybe you > imply to say that any machine you wish to develop a cocoon > block on be outfitted with an installed cocoon instance just > to build the project? > > > > The way I have been able to develop seperate blocks has > been to create a custom Maven plugin that simulates some of > the tasks that are defined in the cocoon block build system, > such as patching configuration files and sitemaps, copying > resources, etc. Surely this is something that cocoon lacks atm. > > This is only with 2.1 "fake blocks". The 2.2 "real blocks" we're > gearing up for are sealed binary units, deployable without a build or > reconfiguration of Cocoon. There is one step, the block > manager deploy > process only necessary to specify deploy specific config values and > resolving of dependencies. They are the "solution to all our > problems > and the answer to all our dreams" (quote from favorite movie and if > anyone can guess it you'll be my new best friend).
Damn, I had to Google that quote ;) > > If you havn't read up on the blocks docs on the wiki lately (the last > two weeks) you really should. Stefano has put a good series > of pages up > detailing the plan and the current implementation ideas. I have tried to follow some of the discussions on that but admit I am more than a little foggy on that. I will take a look at the wiki. I guess then that one of the features of such a system would be to enable easy block developement. It would be so great if class files could be recompiled and reloaded automatically! > > Geoff > >
