Torsten Curdt wrote: >>So we agreed to cut the dependencies and move the logicsheet to the XSP >>block and make the rest of Cocoon XSP free! In fact this reverses the >>dependencies so one idea was to make the additional blocks mentioned above. > > > It does ....but TBH: > > having a some classes or a logicsheet inside a block is only a weak > dependency while having all xsp related classes and logicsheet inside > the xsp block is a strong compile time dependency. > > Sorry to bring this up again ...but it's really annoying and does > not really help anything IMHO. Creating a block just for those few > classes or files feels like bloat to me. > Yeah, sure - but as we regard XSP as legacy and other blocks like session-fw are not legacy, the dependencies like they are now should cause less pain. It seems wrong to me that a non legacy block depends on a legacy one; even if only a small part is affected.
Don't get me wrong, but if we move things back now (and I'm really -1 on this), we will have the same discussion again in lets say three months and everything is questioned again. So, again in general you're right :) but in this case with XSP being legacy it's imho better this way. I personally would not create extra blocks just for the logicsheets but leave them in the XSP block. But *if* XSP users *really* can't live with this extra dependency *than* the solution is to create this extra blocks. Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG http://www.s-und-n.de http://www.osoco.org/weblogs/rael/
