Jacopo,
Thanks for the clarification.
Let's see what other's has to say about it.
--
Ashish
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 6:11 AM, Jacopo Cappellato <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ashish,
>
> yes, what I meant that we could implement the new Minilang operation:
> "call-script"
>
> That operation could then be used to replace the existing "call-bsh"
> operation (that could be deprecated) and also it will be used to call Groovy
> scripts.
>
> Jacopo
>
>
>
> On Jun 26, 2008, at 11:54 AM, Ashish Vijaywargiya wrote:
>
> Jacopo I liked the idea while we include the script file in Screen
>> Definition.
>> But if you will notice Jacques was talking about the Mini Lang call-bsh
>> replacement to call-groovy.
>>
>> Please let me know your thoughts in reference to Mini Lang.
>> Thanks !
>>
>> --
>> Ashish
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 5:34 AM, Jacopo Cappellato <
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> What if we just add a <call-script/> element instead?
>>>
>>> We could then replace all the <call-bsh /> element to the new one.
>>> The new one will use the file suffix to use the proper Processor
>>> (.groovy,
>>> .bsh etc...)
>>> And we may add an optional parameter for the type ("groovy", "bsh" etc...
>>> that can be used if the script files don't have the right suffix).
>>>
>>> For example
>>>
>>> <call-script location="component://pathtoscript/myscript.groovy"/>
>>> <call-script location="component://pathtoscript/myscript.bsh"/>
>>> <call-script location="component://pathtoscript/mygroovyscript.grv"
>>> type="groovy"/>
>>>
>>> Jacopo
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 26, 2008, at 11:10 AM, Ashish Vijaywargiya wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 for adding <call-groovy> in minilang.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I can work on it in my free time as voluntarily if we would like to
>>>> include
>>>> it in framework release.
>>>> Please let me know your thoughts on it.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ashish
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 5:50 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1 for Confluence
>>>>
>>>>> BTW, should we not add a <call-groovy> in minilang (or did I miss
>>>>> something) ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>> From: "David E Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Like Jacopo hinted at, this is a community-driven effort and is
>>>>>
>>>>>> therefore
>>>>>> a bit chaotic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The main thing I was requesting from the community is to focus on the
>>>>>> framework for a little while so we can stabilize and clean up the
>>>>>> framework in preparation for a binary release of it (leading toward a
>>>>>> good
>>>>>> binary release of the whole project... but starting with something
>>>>>> smaller
>>>>>> and easier).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyway, I do have a list of things I've been thinking about and
>>>>>> collecting, some from years ago. What I want to avoid though is making
>>>>>> my
>>>>>> list the official list, or even any sort of majority of the official
>>>>>> list.
>>>>>> In other words, I want this to be a community effort more than I want
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> have everything on my pet list done.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Still, I do like the idea of starting to compile a list of things we'd
>>>>>> all like to see go into the framework, and it's probably about time to
>>>>>> do
>>>>>> that rather than having more random (less communicated) efforts on
>>>>>> different things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm thinking that a confluence/wiki page might be a better place for
>>>>>> now
>>>>>> though, given the tentative nature of some of these things, and often
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> need for discussion before more concrete plans are made.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What do others think of this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jun 22, 2008, at 12:07 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that Bruno's suggestion of creating a "framework-candidate-
>>>>>>
>>>>>> release-x" version in Jira would be useful, especially because there
>>>>>>> is no
>>>>>>> official (or even unofficial) list of features/fixes to go in the
>>>>>>> framework... probably each of us has its own preferences.
>>>>>>> Of course we should try to keep the list small.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Jun 21, 2008, at 7:28 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> David,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think it will be beneficial to all contributors to have a list of
>>>>>>>> what we
>>>>>>>> would like to have included in the framework-only release, don't
>>>>>>>> you?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It will tell how far we are and to have, generally, more efforts on
>>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>>> tasks.
>>>>>>>> Why don't define the framework-only version in JIRA and schedule
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> the task-list ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>>>> -Bruno
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2008/6/20 David E Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This looks good Adrian, thanks for working on it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This was on my own little list of things I'd like to see added to
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> framework before we do the framework-only release, so I'm really
>>>>>>>>> happy
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> see it in!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>
