Carsten Ziegeler napisał(a):
> Yes, I think so - at least for new code we should use the new interfaces.
> Actually I forgot the main reason for the new stuff :) The Avalon
> version is pooled which does not fit nicely into the bean approach (and
> Spring); we have supported for pooling Avalon com
Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:
Carsten Ziegeler napisał(a):
The main reason was to have a simple bean based implementation
that is not tied to Avalon/Excalibur.
The sax parser is one of our core components so having this inside
Cocoon makes sense and reduces dependencies while at the same time
Carsten Ziegeler napisał(a):
The main reason was to have a simple bean based implementation that is
not tied to Avalon/Excalibur.
The sax parser is one of our core components so having this inside
Cocoon makes sense and reduces dependencies while at the same time
allows refactoring the stuff to
Grzegorz Kossakowski:
Hi,
I wonder why we have org.apache.cocoon.core.xml.SAXParser interface
that
is equally the same as org.apache.excalibur.xml.sax.SAXParser?
Carsten, why did you introduce our own interface?
The main reason was to have a simple bean based implementation that
is not t
Hi,
I wonder why we have org.apache.cocoon.core.xml.SAXParser interface that
is equally the same as org.apache.excalibur.xml.sax.SAXParser?
Carsten, why did you introduce our own interface?
--
Grzegorz Kossakowski
