Antonio Gallardo wrote:
On Sab, 11 de Junio de 2005, 10:34, Carsten Ziegeler dijo:
Glen Ezkovich wrote:
The fix appears easy, but is something broken? Has someone expressed
the desire to use two languages in a single sitemap or is this just
an instance of feature creep?
I tend to agree, so I think we should for now just forbid to write
different map:flow sections in a single sitemap (by different I mean
that they use a different interpreter). If someone wants to use more
than one language we can add that easily.
This made me think about the future:
1-Exists or will exists the need to migrate JSflow to javaFlow (legal,
convenience, user desire or whatever)?
After marking Javaflow as stable I guess the majority will use Javaflow, but
there will still be the need for Flowscript. It depends on the software
development process of an organization.
2-Should we want to encourage people to write Javaflow instead of JSFlow?
no, I think offering both options is enough. People can decide themselves.
3-Need to be a web glue for flow code too?
Do you mean that flows of different languages can communicate with each other?
If this is your questions, I'd say that session attributes are good enough. This
is by the way also our answer how two flowscripts (--> only one language) can
exchange information.
If the answer of one of the questions is true, then we should allow them
to coexists. If not, there is not need at all.
As long as we don't hear our users complaining we shouldn't try to find
solutions for a maybe non-exisiting problem.
--
Reinhard P�tz Independent Consultant, Trainer & (IT)-Coach
{Software Engineering, Open Source, Web Applications, Apache Cocoon}
web(log): http://www.poetz.cc
--------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 1GB Speicher kostenlos - Hier anmelden: http://mail.yahoo.de
