Hi,
On 16 Apr 2007, at 20:17, Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:
Apparently, it's different, webapp is used to... assembly a webapp,
run a webapp etc. However, in C2.2 every Cocoon webapp consists of set
of blocks. Webapp gives you infrastructure to assembly your blocks
into WAR file, it also gives you infrastructure to run (with help of
jetty) your application.
Right ... in which case, wouldn't it make sense to have an archetype
for 'simple' applications, that effectively calls the webapp and
block archetypes? It seems like there's currently a *lot* of work to
do even for creating a simple publishing site, with no custom code.
There's no sitemap, and on jetty startup there's errors like
"Could not
instantiate listener
org.springframework.web.context.ContextLoaderListener". Only the
block
archetype contains the necessary stuff to run - and so I have to
create
a block as well.
That's right. Thinking about it further, I wonder if we could
provide more meaningful message that webapp is empty so it cannot
do any thing
useful and one has to create block and start hacking there?
That would be very good.
I think that webapp archetype should not be extended in any way.
All we have to do is to say user's that application's code should
be put in
one or more blocks. See also: http://cocoon.zones.apache.org/daisy/
cdocs-site-main/g2/1159.html
But blocks still seem kinda heavyweight to me, if all I want is XML,
XSLT, sitemap ....
Thanks,
Andrew.
--
Andrew Savory, Managing Director, Sourcesense UK
Tel: +44 (0)870 741 6658 Fax: +44 (0)700 598 1135
Web: http://www.sourcesense.com/
