Peter Donald wrote:
Hmmm, why do you think they are 'vastly different'? it has been shown on cocoon-dev that Cocoon Block should extend Avalon Blocks and I think it would be very cool to be able to install a Cocoon block into, say, Phoenix and having phoenix use the part of the blocks semantics that is avalon-oriented (say, use the component services, but not not the sitemap)On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 15:31, Peter Donald wrote:BTW - it may be best not to name them "Blocks". Phoenix already has the notion of blocks which is vastly different from what Cocoon proposes to use the term for. It would confusing to name two different concepts with identical names. Given that Phoenix (and it's predecessor) has been using the term since before I was involved in Avalon it may be best to rename Cocoon blocks to something else so as to avoid confusion from users.On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 11:04, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:I agree with you that ECM is crappy code. And you know that in order to implement Cocoon Blocks, we'll need a much more modern (and thought-out) container and that in order to be able to do that, we might even allow some back-incompatible changes (for something like Cocoon 3.0) where it does make sense to break compatibility.
I thought the goal of Avalon 5 was to keep things moveable across containers. Am I wrong?
--
Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
