Andrew Stevens wrote:
By the way, what does the repository block (which contains the
TraversableGenerator) do anyway? It's not mentioned in the list on the
wiki at http://wiki.apache.org/cocoon/BlockDescriptions
Sorry for the late answer.
The repository block was once meant to contain abstra
From: Gianugo Rabellino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 10:29:03 +0200
On 7/14/05, Daniel Fagerstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't think it is a good idea to deprecate things that have been
> arround in Cocoon from the very beginning and is part of about every
> book, tutorial
On 7/14/05, Daniel Fagerstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't think it is a good idea to deprecate things that have been
> arround in Cocoon from the very beginning and is part of about every
> book, tutorial and article that have been written about Cocoon.
I can clearly see your point. Bein
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
On 14.07.2005 10:59, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
1. move TraversableGenerator to src/core,
+1
+1
deprecate DirectoryGenerator leaving it untouched
Read below.
2. insert some log.xxx("DG is now deprecated, please use TG instead"),
where "xxx" is promoted from
On 14.07.2005 10:59, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
Don't want to rain on the party, but this has been exactly the kind of
discussion that led nowhere a couple years ago.
Sorry for that ...
I'm now convinced that
File/DirectoryGenerator are there to stay, there is just too much
stuff depending on
Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
On 7/14/05, Joerg Heinicke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Michael Wechner wyona.com> writes:
Wow, 2 years ago! And what about starting a real migration now by
starting with the unclean way (DirectoryG extends TraversableG with
old namespace and directory/file meta
On 7/14/05, Joerg Heinicke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael Wechner wyona.com> writes:
>
> > > Wow, 2 years ago! And what about starting a real migration now by
> > > starting with the unclean way (DirectoryG extends TraversableG with
> > > old namespace and directory/file metaphore as you wr
Michael Wechner wyona.com> writes:
> > Wow, 2 years ago! And what about starting a real migration now by
> > starting with the unclean way (DirectoryG extends TraversableG with
> > old namespace and directory/file metaphore as you wrote it),
> > deprecating it at the same time and making the T
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
On 13.07.2005 23:38, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
DirectoryGenerator extends TraversableGenerator
We've been through this before:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=10578281593&r=1&w=2
In a word: backward compatibility.
Wow, 2 years ago! And what about starting a rea
Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
On 7/13/05, Michael Wechner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Unico Hommes wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Wechner wrote
I think it would make sense to make a
note
within the DirectoryGenerator that the TraversableGenerator exists and is
On 13.07.2005 23:38, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
DirectoryGenerator extends TraversableGenerator
We've been through this before:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=10578281593&r=1&w=2
In a word: backward compatibility.
Wow, 2 years ago! And what about starting a real migration now by
starti
On 7/13/05, Michael Wechner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Unico Hommes wrote:
>
> >-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >Hash: SHA1
> >
> >Michael Wechner wrote
> > I think it would make sense to make a
> >note
> >within the DirectoryGenerator that the TraversableGenerator exists and is
> >more gen
Unico Hommes wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Wechner wrote
I think it would make sense to make a
note
within the DirectoryGenerator that the TraversableGenerator exists and is
more generic.
In fact IMHO, it should be deprecated in favor of TraversableGenerator
Unico Hommes wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Wechner wrote:
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
On 13.07.2005 00:28, Michael Wechner wrote:
It seems to me that the directory generator is not really based
on the "abstract methods" of an excalibur Source, but ra
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Wechner wrote:
> Joerg Heinicke wrote:
>
>> On 13.07.2005 00:28, Michael Wechner wrote:
>>
>>> It seems to me that the directory generator is not really based
>>> on the "abstract methods" of an excalibur Source, but rather takes
>>> the sourc
Michael Wechner wrote:
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
On 13.07.2005 00:28, Michael Wechner wrote:
It seems to me that the directory generator is not really based
on the "abstract methods" of an excalibur Source, but rather takes
the source and "maps" it onto a java.io.File.
Is that intended or just n
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
On 13.07.2005 00:28, Michael Wechner wrote:
It seems to me that the directory generator is not really based
on the "abstract methods" of an excalibur Source, but rather takes
the source and "maps" it onto a java.io.File.
Is that intended or just not implemented for the l
On 13.07.2005 00:28, Michael Wechner wrote:
It seems to me that the directory generator is not really based
on the "abstract methods" of an excalibur Source, but rather takes
the source and "maps" it onto a java.io.File.
Is that intended or just not implemented for the lack of time?
I would lik
Hi
It seems to me that the directory generator is not really based
on the "abstract methods" of an excalibur Source, but rather takes
the source and "maps" it onto a java.io.File.
Is that intended or just not implemented for the lack of time?
I would like to make this more generic with regard t
19 matches
Mail list logo
