[jira] Closed: (COCOON-2097) Old excalibur-sourcereolve is still in lib directory after r557984
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COCOON-2097?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Antonio Gallardo closed COCOON-2097. Resolution: Fixed Assignee: Antonio Gallardo Fixed. See: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=560052 > Old excalibur-sourcereolve is still in lib directory after r557984 > -- > > Key: COCOON-2097 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COCOON-2097 > Project: Cocoon > Issue Type: Bug > Components: * Cocoon Core >Affects Versions: 2.1.11-dev (Current SVN) >Reporter: Richard Frovarp >Assignee: Antonio Gallardo > Fix For: 2.1.11-dev (Current SVN) > > > The old exaclibur-sourcereolve jar is still present, but no longer referenced > in jars.xml. Several people using Lenya have had issues building due to this. > Removing the offending jar fixes the issue. I see in r557984 the license was > removed for the old version, and > cocoon/branches/BRANCH_2_1_X/lib/core/excalibur-sourceresolve-2.1.jar was > modified. It would appear that it should have been deleted instead. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
imageop suggestion
The imageop block is quite useful for image operations, much more so than the imagereader in the core. It would be nice if it could be released. However there seems to be some problems with rotation code. I mostly managed to get lots of black areas, and spurious image fragments in the rotated image. I had a look at the cocde and its not obvious what a rotation should do, which I think is the root cause of the problem. (that is, what should be the bounding box, where should the anchor for rotation be etc) I propose hiding the general rotation operator, and implementing a rotate-at-right-angle operator. This special case is IMHO the most useful type of rotation, its obvious how it should work, and could be more easily implemented and perhaps optimized. I can implement this if the list decides this is a good idea. (I will probably anyway for my own needs). The general rotation operator could be tackledd later, but wouldnt be necessary for release. -- Joakim Verona
Re: [2.2] consider me inactive
Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote: Vadim, I remember that I have not responded to your e-mail regarding services: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.text.xml.cocoon.devel/73790 I knew that you are talking about REST-style services and I didn't know much more than standard hype about REST design but I was just about borrowing "RESTful Web Services" book from our local JUG leader at the time. Now, I almost completed the book and can give insightful clarification on cocoon-servlet-service-fw vs RESTful architecture and methodology. Where are similarities and where are not. I have written some bits of such document but I've just got to know that I have to leave and stay offline until Sunday so I'll probably publish it on Monday and everyone will (hopefully) get a chance to understand what is a scope of servlet-service-fw despite the functionality is actually in there or is just planned. Gregorz: I'm looking forward to that read. I'm reading through the RWS book as well currently and got pulled to the restlet.org framework as a basis for resource oriented architectures. Pretty mind-opening stuff (the book and the framework) and I really think there are quite some lessons / opportunities to gain from there. On the client side the ajax patterns book (http://ajaxpatterns.org/Book) plays the equivalent role according to me (although maybe in a lesser way then RWS) As it lists some common concepts and strategies for building RIA's. With both movements (ROA/RIA) at full speed I think cocoon 2.1 but even 2.2 (afaik it) is pretty close to be eternally marked as a clear altough stubbornly deviant sample of 'the middle-ages of web app writing' (marked by web browser wars and a philosophical reign of essentially just the cgi model). Uh: And _we_ should be close to finally understanding the prophetic powers of Stefano [1] :-) Anyway "not being active" in web dev land is not an option IMHO. So the interesting question Bertrand is sneaking in here is "Where his/our activity is/should be pointed at nowadays?" :-) Let's be honest: one can easily argue that there are better places to put activity in then in keeping compatibility and living up to the (ohoh) expectations of an ever declining number of users. (As Bertrand's post is suggesting: those are just fine with some maintenance work on the 2.1.x branch anyway) If I'm missing anything in our 2.2. moves then it is a "clean slate" and some freshly burnt down bush and rainforest to start growing new ideas. It feels (from some distance, I admit) as if we keep dragging our history with us, rather then only our witty experience. As Stefano clearly stated almost 2 years ago: "It is time to move on". The biggest difference now is that there might be a bigger base of people ready to do so, and with a more clear view on 'where to'. Maybe the upcoming GT could offer the platform to let different views on that 'where to' conflict? I know we have a tendency of talking a lot and doing too little (me guilty) but I really think we can use a good thought-fight... regards, -marc= (who thinks that the worst thing lingering behind an inactive Bertrand is having to miss him speaking to us from the GT podium :-)) [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.text.xml.cocoon.devel/55131
