Re: src/webapp/WEB-INF/entities

2006-02-18 Thread David Crossley 
Jean-Baptiste Quenot wrote:
 * David Crossley:
 
  I think that it is a core facility that is often needed.  Why do
  you want to  be rid of it? There is not  really any overhead, is
  there.
 
 Nonono,  don't worry  I  don't  want to  get  rid  of the  catalog
 resolving facility.   Just greatly  reduce the  amount of  mess in
 this directory.
 
 Thanks for your comments.  However,  except for the comment in the
 README file, the catalog-demo and  document*.dtd, there is still a
 lot of things,  like open-office, w3c and  docbook-simple.  Who is
 using them?

There is no way to know.

Doing 'svn log' shows info about the reasons that
some of them were added.

People might also be using the document*.dtd to run
their own documentation site via Cocoon. Just because
we removed our documentation webapp does not mean that
other people don't use that ability.

I suppose that we could leave this stuff untouched
in 2.1 and in 2.2 remove all but a few core examples
which show how to configure their own resources.

That makes it easier maintenance for us, but more
difficult for users.

Is a comment (and a link to docs) in the status.xml
sufficient to notify about such a change? 

-David

Re: src/webapp/WEB-INF/entities

2006-02-15 Thread David Crossley 
Jean-Baptiste Quenot wrote:
 * David Crossley:
  Jean-Baptiste Quenot wrote:
 
   I  would  like  to  know  what  purpose  serves  the  existing
   resources  in webapp/WEB-INF/entities?   I know  that one  can
   setup a catalog for resolving  entities, but I'm talking about
   all the stuff: DTDs, schemas, etc.   Is it really useful for a
   mean web application?
 
  The configuration stuff is definitely necessary.
 
 What stuff to be precise?

The entities/catalog and the entry in cocoon.xconf

  Many of the resources are  probably not necessary.  For example,
  the  document-v*.dtd etc.  were needed  when we  had the  Cocoon
  documentation  packaged   with  the  webapp  and   generated  by
  Cocoon. That  has all  been ripped  out so  probably don't  need
  them.
 
 OK so we can remove them.
 
   In the README, there is a message that I don't understand:
  
   ??Please keep  these resources in sync  with the authoritative
   stuff at Forrest.??
 
  The  DTDs started  life at  Cocoon, then  Forrest took  over the
  maintenance. With the documentation  situation that is mentioned
  above, we did need to keep these synchronised.
 
 So we can remove this comment in the README file?

Yes.

   I'm proposing to add a build option to avoid copying all these
   often-unnecessary resources.
  
   WDYT?
 
  Perhaps better to remove the stuff  that we don't need.  I would
  suggest to leave the ISO*.pen entity sets which are often needed
  by applications.
 
 No problem  if it  is needed  by a few  applications, but  we must
 optionally avoid copying them.

Why must we?

  The entities/web-app_2_3.dtd might be needed.
 
 Webapp runs without it, I hope  we are not issuing an HTTP request
 to Sun's website everytime ;)

Did you check? ngrep.sf.net helps ... 'sudo ngrep dtd'

  The  entities/catalog-demo/  is  needed  by  some  of  the  core
  samples.
 
 So we don't have to copy them if exclude.samples has been set?

True. That will save 3k.

 Anyway, we are able to run our application without this entities
 directory.  So I think we should allow to optionally avoid to copy
 those  resources.  Let's  decide what  is the  best name  for this
 option, maybe this is already the exclude.documentation option?

No they are not related to documentation. The entity resolver
is needed whenever a source xml file declares a DTD.
http://cocoon.apache.org/2.1/userdocs/concepts/catalog.html

Often people do not realise that they need it.
They are requesting DTDs on every parse and could
speed up their application.

I think that it is a core facility that is often needed.
Why do you want to be rid of it? There is not really any
overhead, is there.

-David

Re: src/webapp/WEB-INF/entities

2006-02-15 Thread Jean-Baptiste Quenot 
* David Crossley:

 I think that it is a core facility that is often needed.  Why do
 you want to  be rid of it? There is not  really any overhead, is
 there.

Nonono,  don't worry  I  don't  want to  get  rid  of the  catalog
resolving facility.   Just greatly  reduce the  amount of  mess in
this directory.

Thanks for your comments.  However,  except for the comment in the
README file, the catalog-demo and  document*.dtd, there is still a
lot of things,  like open-office, w3c and  docbook-simple.  Who is
using them?
-- 
Jean-Baptiste Quenot
http://caraldi.com/jbq/