Upayavira wrote:
Below you explain the role of pom.xml and the role of block.xml. From a
technology point of view, I can see why you are going this way.
However, if we think of a newcomer to Cocoon, I can see this as being
unnecessarily complicated. Why are some things in pom.xml and others in
block.xml? Well, er, because Maven doesn't know how to handle the stuff
in block.xml.
Would it not be possible to put the block.xml data somehow into the
pom.xml file, and have it read by the block deployer mojo?
Even if it were the same info just embedded into the pom.xml file, this
would be substantially more user friendly, IMO.
Does this make sense?
Let's see which information needs to be added to pom.xml:
- dependencies (block dependencies are different to Maven 2 dependencies)
- extension
- implementations
- servlet (sitemap)
- components
Jorg and I have tried to find appropriate places but we were not able to come up
with a convincing solution. Maybe somebody else is more successfull ... <hint/>
Well, I would also prefer having only one file instead of two. Having said this
I'm not sure if it is really more user friendly because of what we need and what
Maven pom.xmls offer. E.g. dependencies have a different meaning in Cocoon than
Maven dependencies and the Maven folks have a reason why they don't want to
allow dependency properties [1]
Another point is that having a schema for block.xml makes editing very simple
because of code completion and validation of XML editors.
[1] http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVENUSER/
FAQs#FAQs-WhytherearenodependencypropertiesinMaven2%3F
--
Reinhard Pötz Independent Consultant, Trainer & (IT)-Coach
{Software Engineering, Open Source, Web Applications, Apache Cocoon}
web(log): http://www.poetz.cc
--------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de
