well i was maybe not that clear. in regards of the spool servlet
implemention: currently ("big" sling) a file can addressed by path
and sling spooles it out of the repository, which is very cool and
should be supported as well in the micro sling. so how the spool part
is implemented is another story and if we could use the webdav stuff
(jackrabbit) for that which works really well and supports all the
http 1.1 stuff, so why don't we use that?
regards, philipp
On 10/19/07, Philipp Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the way how the current "big" sling does spool static resources out of
> the repository is very nice and should somehow (as suggested by felix
> (kind of spool servlet) added to the micro sling "product" as well.
>
> regards,
> philipp
>
> On 10/19/07, Felix Meschberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > At first sight, this looks intriguing indeed. But on second sight, it
> > mixes concepts introduces dependencies and just does not seem right.
> >
> > In addition to my other post, where I postulate a SpoolServlet, I would
> > say, that we should not mix microsling/Sling generation and WebDAV
> > generation as it will never correctly workout, unfortunately.
> >
> > Rather I would say microsling/Sling generates all output itself. To
> > support WebDAV through microsling/Sling we should create a different
> > WebApp which is only responsible for supporting WebDAV.
> >
> > Regards
> > Felix
> >
> > Am Freitag, den 19.10.2007, 09:48 +0200 schrieb David Nuescheler:
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > > > ...- the content templates reside in the repository (i.e . on a
> > > > > WebDAV drive in
> > > > > my case). However, static html pages need to reside in the war
> > > > > file....
> > > > Would an "initial content loader" mechanism be useful? I have some
> > > > code from another project that copies all resources found under
> > > > WEB-INF/initial-content into the repository at startup, is that
> > > > something that would help you in your application setup?
> > > I think I am missing something...
> > >
> > > Shouldn't you be able to to just put any static file into the repository
> > > via
> > > webdav, and then just use the webdav url to retrieve it again?
> > >
> > > That being said, i think it would be great if microsling ootb handles
> > > "static resources" properly. I think if someone addresses
> > > an item with an "exact match" in a url (no additional extensions or
> > > selector)
> > > I think that resource should be taken care of the same way as we do that
> > > in the
> > > WebDAV layer today...
> > >
> > >
> > > As an example let's say my repo looks like this.
> > >
> > > /content [nt:unstructured]
> > > /content/myblog [my:blog]
> > > /content/docroot [nt:folder]
> > > /content/docroot/privacy.html [nt:file]
> > >
> > > I think the resolution of GET requests to the following urls should
> > > work as follows:
> > >
> > > http://myhost/content/myblog.html -> /content/myblog execs the "html.esp"
> > > http://myhost/content/docroot/privacy.html -> delegates to webdav
> > > since it was an "exact match"
> > > http://myhost.content/docroot -> delegates to webdav since it was an
> > > "exact match"
> > > http://myhost.content/docroot.html -> /content/docroot execs the
> > > "html.esp"
> > >
> > > This should also allow to bind webdav directly to microsling, which i
> > > find more intuitive.
> > >
> > > Does that make sense?
> > >
> > > regards,
> > > david
> >
> >
>
