Rob van Maris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Perhaps it would be a nice idea to ship 1.7 with the taglib > > in a seperate jar. This will make it easier to upgrade only > > the taglib, or to remove it completely if you don't like it. > > What is the problem this is supposed to solve?
The stated, and further that it makes it optimally clear that is only an 'addition' to mmbase. Having seperate 'chunks' also makes it easier to see what kind of mmbase installation you have at hand: WEB-INF/lib$ ls log4j.jar mmbase-community.jar mmbase.jar oscache.jar jspsmartupload.jar mmbase-cloudcontextsecurity.jar mmbase-editwizard.jar mmbase-taglib.jar In one glance I see that this is an installation using 'community', 'cloud context security' 'editwizards' and 'taglib'. Also web.xml can get a bit less cryptical: <taglib> <taglib-uri>http://www.mmbase.org/mmbase-taglib-1.0</taglib-uri> <taglib-location>/WEB-INF/lib/mmbase-taglib.jar</taglib-location> </taglib> which looks more sensical than 'mmbase.jar' for a taglib location. > Also, is it realistic to assume that changes in the taglib don't require > updates to the MMBase core? I think so, yes. Taglib should only use bridge, which is supposed to be relatively stable. For example the current 1.7 taglib does work in Resin. For that it was needed to rewrite some parts of it, so I did not dare to do it in 1.6. Of course, the current taglib would also not compile against 1.6, but if the scripts and so on were available (they are now in the 'applications' module) it would have been a piece of cake to compile the 'fixed', but majorly changed taglib against 1.6 (and make sure that that would work), and release it seperately for those who use Resin. Now, it's a package deal, if you want to use the new taglib, you are enforced to also upgrade to mmbase 1.7. > My first impression is this is just going to create more confusion about > releases - what versions of mmbase.jar and taglib are compatible - while > directing attention away from regular maintenance and milestone > releases. That is a good point. For the moment the jar would however simply be marked with the same version as the mmbase.jar of the same CVS branch. If we don't have time, or it proves to be impractical to actual release it seperately, then we simply don't The only thing which would have been changed is that in a upgrade you don't replace mmbase.jar but mmbase*.jar. But at least the possibility to do it differently will be there. Michiel -- Michiel Meeuwissen Mediapark C101 Hilversum +31 (0)35 6772979 nl_NL, eo, en_US mihxil' []()
