Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:
> Reinhard Pötz pisze:
>> Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
>>>> Author: reinhard Date: Thu Aug 14 00:43:31 2008 New Revision: 685792
>>>>
>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=685792&view=rev Log: The
>>>> BlockPathPropertyPlaceholderConfigurer module is *usually* only useful
>>>> if the SSF is used
>>>> together with Cocoon. In this case you always need the SSF-components.
>>>> Hence it's best to move it
>>>> to into this module so that Cocoon 2.2 can still be run in the
>>>> 'classic' mode.
>>> Somehow agreed. It looks like nobody is going to use SSF+Blocks
>>> infrastructure without Cocoon Core, right? :-)
>>>
>>>> (I can't help myself but somehow the
>>>> BlockPathPropertyPlaceholderConfigurer seems to be a hack
>>>> anyway ...)
>>> What do you mean by that? What makes it hacky?
>>
>> I'm still not convinced that we should expose block resources directly.
>> But there are use cases for it
>> (http://cocoon.markmail.org/message/vr72n4vr7lfpppfe) and we've already
>> introduced this contract so it probably doesn't make much sense to
>> discuss this again.
>
> Ah, thanks to bringing this thread back to my mind! :-)
>
> Yes, I agree that in 99% cases one should not expose block's resources
> but still there might be some egde-cases were it's needed.
>
> The real task to be done is to make people more aware of servlet:
> protocol...
>
Yep, and thanks to JNet the servlet protocol also works for java.net.URL
objects which wasn't the case when this feature was added.
--
Reinhard Pötz Managing Director, {Indoqa} GmbH
http://www.indoqa.com/en/people/reinhard.poetz/
Member of the Apache Software Foundation
Apache Cocoon Committer, PMC member [EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________________________________________________________
