DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25594.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
So WDYT, does this make sense for your use cases?
Yes, for the pipelines part but that's not the whole story.
Just two thoughts: Don't know what we gain when we introduce two separate
deployment units (bundles and blocks). Maybe it's more confusing than helping.
If
Ralph Goers wrote:
Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
Blocks are of course also packaged, distributed and dependency
resolved much like the bundles above.
--- o0o ---
So WDYT, does this make sense for your use cases?
Thanks. Yes, this makes a lot more sense. I'm not
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
So WDYT, does this make sense for your use cases?
Yes, for the pipelines part but that's not the whole story.
Just two thoughts: Don't know what we gain when we introduce two
separate deployment units (bundles and blocks). Maybe it's more
Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
Maybe not, but those are areas that are rather vague anyway, we where
the only ones who thought it had much importance the last time we
discussed it.
Maybe it had the appearance but I can't believe this. (Recently I had a
discussion with Sylvain and he really wants this
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
Maybe not, but those are areas that are rather vague anyway, we where
the only ones who thought it had much importance the last time we
discussed it.
Maybe it had the appearance but I can't believe this. (Recently I had
a discussion with Sylvain
Erik Bruchez wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
o We do strongly believe that the XML pipeline language in OPS beats
the ... out of Cocoon pipelines ;-)
Oh, that's a bold statement :-)
Yes ;-)
eheh, one step up and two step back. Your pipeline language feels
turing complete (haven't
Sorry for the OT and the crosspost, but I'm running out of resources
and I need this for a Cocoon-based webapp anyway.
If anyone here has any experience with Java Advanced Imaging, would
he/she please have a look at this question:
answered on the web site :)
-- dims
On 4/18/05, Ugo Cei [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry for the OT and the crosspost, but I'm running out of resources
and I need this for a Cocoon-based webapp anyway.
If anyone here has any experience with Java Advanced Imaging, would
he/she please have a
On Apr 18, 2005, at 7:05 AM, Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
The portal definition files define how individual portlets are
invoked and rendered. As I stated before, ideally these would be
separate blocks. However, since many will contain java code, it
sounds like many portlets would have to be a
Hi,
We just updated from 2.1.5 to 2.1.7, and the authentication (login-action)
stopped functioning. It seems that no parameters are no longer forwarded
to the authentication resource. We have the same configuration as in
the samples, using: cocoon:raw:/authenticate as the authentication
11 matches
Mail list logo
