-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:

Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:19:26 +0100
From: Daniel Fagerstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Block deployment: working with blocks from a user's point of view

Reinhard Poetz skrev:
 Giacomo Pati wrote:

 <snip/>

> In Reinhards document it is META-INF/block.xml on the Wiki it's > COB-INF/block.xml. So we need to make a decision:-)

 Please use META-INF/block.xml, AFAIK we agreed on making our blocks valid
 JAR files.

Ok.

...
> > Now to answer your question ;) the position of the .xconf of a block > > is defined in the components element of block.xml. > > Ok, looking at [1] it is defined in the block.xconf file, which is > located in COB-INF (or WEB-INF or META-INF respectively). Is that still > correct?

 I'm not sure where block.xconf should go to. I'd put it under cocoon-app
 and not under META-INF. WDOT?

block.xml contains or point to the block.xconf, so it can be place anywhere.

I haven't found any formal specification about this "pointer to block.xconf". The only thing I've found on the wiki if COB-INF/block.xconf (so now META-INF/block.xconf).

But if we should have a default place, wouldn't META-INF be the most natural place?

+1

Also, even if it isn't implemented yet, the idea is to make the choice of component container configurable, something like:

...
  <components class="org.apache.cocoon.core.container.CoreServiceManager">
    // Container specific configuration
 </components>
...

Hmm.. the tricky part will be how to instantiate such a (unknown) FQCN from the class attribute. This needs a formal interface which such ServiceManagers must implements to allow the Deployer (or is it the BlockManager) to initialize the component container.

So a default name isn't possible.

Except you only allow containers know to us and instead of a class attribute you'll have a type (or whatever) attribute which you can select from the implenetations we do have. Of course this way it isn't individually extensible.

- -- Giacomo Pati
Otego AG, Switzerland - http://www.otego.com
Orixo, the XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDx510LNdJvZjjVZARAitjAJ4/THIUZlyO6Nx366GQ3mLp4RMSLACgsaZQ
21EkasoE8rnwPmWYgx3F884=
=7xhp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----