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 block with a matching bundle.
A block can contain code. It is just (at least in the first step) not allowed to expose components. So if the portlet components need to be accessible from other parts of the system you need both a bundle and a block. But if the components only are needed internally and the portlet can expose all its functionality as pipeline functionality, it is enough with a block.
Sorry to be late to the party, but I was unsure where this discussion was headed and choose to keep my mouth shut. I'm glad to see to that blocks can have code again.;-) I think the issue of exposing components is a non issue. We are after all talking about java byte code, if some one wants to use the jar/class file it just needs to be on the classpath. The issue here is one of deployment, where to locate the class and which ClassLoader will load the class. It seems to me that if we have two component deployment levels, global and sitemap, we can pretty much accomplish the same thing as exposing or not exposing components.
WDYT?
Glen Ezkovich HardBop Consulting glen at hard-bop.com
A Proverb for Paranoids:
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers."
- Thomas Pynchon Gravity's Rainbow
