On 10/31/07, Felix Meschberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ...On the other hand we could create a separate project for each scripting > engine (probably outside of microsling inside a sling-scripting > container. These would be implemented such as to provide easy use in the > real sling. ...
That's my preferred option: create one OSGi-compatible bundle jar for each ScriptEngine, that can be used in microsling as well. That implies a separate Maven module for each engine, under sling-script/engines maybe. > ...To be used in microsling, the microsling-webapp would have > to be manually modified.... Not necessarily: we can list all known engines in the default webapp, so that people just have to drop a jar file in the right place to activate those engines. > ...Ultimately, I still like the init-param based method best for > microsling.... I'd be fine with that, if we list all current engines in web.xml. -Bertrand
