> -----Original Message----- > From: Marc Portier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 1:08 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [CForms] Small "scope" patch in JXPathBindingBuilderBase.java > (was: RE: [CForms] Change proposal in Custom bindings) > > Bart, > > I had some troubles with eclipse + subclipse but was working on the same > my commit and your patch just crossed. > > I noticed you loosened the access on the inner class to public, just > shout if you need it.
Yes, I need it to be public. Otherwise the class CustomJXPathBinding (in my package) can't see it. Thanks so far! > > -marc= > > Bart Molenkamp wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I've created a patch, and attached it in this mail. Do I need to put it > > in bugzilla (it's just a very very small patch)?? > > > > Bart. > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Bart Molenkamp > >>Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 3:29 PM > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Subject: RE: [CForms] Change proposal in Custom bindings > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>>-----Original Message----- > >>>From: Marc Portier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 3:18 PM > >>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>Subject: Re: [CForms] Change proposal in Custom bindings > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>Bart Molenkamp wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Your solution works, tetting path to "." and passing another path > > > > in > > > >>a > >> > >>>>config element works. But I don't think it's a logical solution, > >> > >>since > >> > >>>>all binding elements look like <fb:... id="x" path="y"/>, except > > > > for > > > >>>>this one, where the path is passed in a config node. > >>>> > >>> > >>>this is a matter of viewpoint I'm afraid > >>> > >>>personally I don't find it logical that your property might be null > >> > >>:-) > >> > >>>>There is still a (small) problem however, I need a service > > > > manager. > > > >>>yep, got that, that's why I suggested the own binding builder > >> > >>BTW the patch I submitted already passes the service manager to custom > >>bindings that implement Serviceable. It doesn't change anything for > >>existing custom bindings. Maybe useful for custom bindings in general? > >> > >> > >>>>If I want to straigt for my own binding builder, I have another > > > > very > > > >>>>very small change I need. The class > >>>>JXPathBindingBuilderBase.CommonAttributes and the method > >>>>getCommonAttributes() needs public (or protected) scope. That way > > > > I > > > >>can > >> > >>>>create the builder in my own packages. > >>>> > >>> > >>>sure, makes sense! > >> > >>Okay, so I'll write my own binding builder. Shall I put a patch for > >>those 2 "scope" changes in bugzilla? > >> > >> > >>>-marc= > >>> > >>> > >>>>Bart. > >>>> > >>>>-----Original Message----- > >>>>From: Marc Portier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 5:21 PM > >>>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>Subject: Re: [CForms] Change proposal in Custom bindings > >>>> > >>>>I had a quick scan through your problem and patches (and sorry for > >> > >>not > >> > >>>>doing that earlier) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>AFAICS you would get the same effect by just ommitting the xpath > >> > >>from > >> > >>>>the binding and adding it as a nested config > >>>> > >>>>ie not > >>>> <fb:custom id="x" path="something" > >>>> builderclass="mypack.CustomValueWrapBinding" > >>>> factorymethod="createBinding" /> > >>>> > >>>>but rather > >>>> <fb:custom id="config" > >>>> builderclass="mypack.CustomValueWrapBinding" > >>>> factorymethod="createBinding" > > >>>> <fb:config propspath="some" /> > >>>> </fb:custom> > >>>> > >>>>that way the path="." will be assumed on the wrapper and the > >>>>parent-context will be passed down so your custom binding can > > > > narrow > > > >>>>down with the local config 'propspath' (potentially checking for > >> > >>null's > >> > >>>>first) > >>>> > >>>>see > >> > >>http://cocoon.apache.org/2.1/userdocs/forms/binding.html#fb%3Acustom > >> > >>>> > >>>>if you need more control then this, I suggest skipping the > >>>>custom-binding alltogether and go straight for the own builder and > >>>>binding + declaring the builder in the xconf file. (you're not > > > > that > > > >>far > >> > >>>>off) > >>>> > >>>>see > >>>> > >> > > http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/cocoon/trunk/src/blocks/forms/conf/for > > > >>>>ms-binding.xconf?rev=30945&root=Apache-SVN&view=auto > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>above seems to indicate that what you need can be done already, > > > > pls > > > >>>>comment if that is not the case > >>>> > >>>>regards, > >>>>-marc= > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>Bart Molenkamp wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>Hi all, > >>>>> > >>>>>A few weeks ago I made a request for a small change in > >>>>>CustomJXPathBinding. It can be found here [1]. I already > > > > implemented > > > >>>>the > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>change, made a patch, and placed it in bugzilla [2]. But noone was > >>>> > >>>>gave > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>me some response to this change (maybe due to vacations?) So I was > >>>>>wondering; are there people interested in this change, or do I > > > > need > > > >>to > >> > >>>>>maintain this change in the source tree of my project? > >>>>> > >>>>>Bart. > >>>>> > >>>>>[1] > >>>> > >>>> > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=109231695032545&w=2 > > > >>>>>[2] http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30693 > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>-- > >>>Marc Portier http://outerthought.org/ > >>>Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center > >>>Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/mpo/ > >>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -- > Marc Portier http://outerthought.org/ > Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center > Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/mpo/ > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
