-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Reinhard Poetz wrote: > Unico Hommes wrote: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Reinhard Poetz wrote: >> >>> Unico Hommes wrote: >>> >>> Nice to see you back Unico! >> >> >> >> Thanks Reinhard! Lurker mode is off now, but still have some catching up >> to do. One of the things I'd been meaning to find out is what is the >> status of your blocks builder > > > the block-builder works as described on the wiki page. It uses the > block.xml to generate an Ant script out of it which builds the block > resolving all dependencies. Currently it requires more knowledge about > how blocks will actually look like. AFAIU only little work is left but > this requires more work on the implementation of real blocks (Daniel's > current work on the Block(s)Manager, the OSGi integration) >
Ah, ok that explains the rather suspended state of that effort I was sensing. >> and blocks deployer > > > Ihe interfaces are pretty stable and the unit tests are already able to > deploy a block. My last commits dealt with updating the wiring.xml but > this hasn't been finished. I guess that it will take about 5 working > days to finish the missing parts and some additional time to adapt it > according to the requirements that will arise with the actual block > implementation. > > As we currently have the ongoing discussion about OSGi, I agree with > Daniel and Sylvain that we will have to provide our own deployment tools > as our needs are too special. But maybe I 'm (we're) wrong here. > > Of course any help is very appreciated! > > efforts. Especially, > >> is blocks builder the intented build system for 2.2? > > > hmmm, IMO yes ;-) Some others want to use Maven. As said in some former > discussions, it will not matter which build system will build a COB as > long as it follows the (to be done) COB specification (block.xml, > directory structure). I generated Ant scripts out of block descriptors > (block.xml) as I know much more about Ant than about Maven. Finally, I > think we will be able to provide support for both build systems which > isn't a disadvantage IMO. Exactly my thinking. In fact the reason I asked is that I was thinking of starting a Maven2 plugin for cocoon. I've been looking at the emerging Maven2 effort that is due to come out this summer and I think its going to be a killer. IIUC I can just start that in the whiteboard without a vote right? - -- Unico -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCk7kVcuec8tVNKAwRAo9HAKCl4Nt/Erzit+xrrA3A/i6YeirfhQCeIRNk LNlRcS6kqE73NMF6MmbEJ+c= =Ky+y -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
