Not sure I understand this. I guess its to do with the
ExtensibleURLArtifactProcessor that strips off the extension and
searches for processors only by those extensions. So even if the
URLArtifactProcessor.getArtifactType() returned 'definitions.xml' we'd
still have a problem. I guess we have
Cool, if you can wait a day, i can take a look at that...
Sebastien suggestion seems ok:
Instead of URLArtifactProcessor.getType() returning
.composite for *.composite files
definition.xml for definition.xml files
URLArtifactProcessor.getType() could return
*.composite for *.composites files
Venkata Krishnan wrote:
Not sure I understand this. I guess its to do with the
ExtensibleURLArtifactProcessor that strips off the extension and
searches for processors only by those extensions. So even if the
URLArtifactProcessor.getArtifactType() returned 'definitions.xml' we'd
still have a
:) thanks. That makes sense to me.
- Venkat
On 8/9/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Venkata Krishnan wrote:
Not sure I understand this. I guess its to do with the
ExtensibleURLArtifactProcessor that strips off the extension and
searches for processors only by those
[snip]
Venkata Krishnan wrote:
Hi Sebastien, thanks. I've figured out all of this already :) Just
the one hanging thing - the definitions.xml is an artifact that might
have to be picked up by the contribution service. While processors
for all other documents could be found by their unique
Could we extend the logic in ExtensibleURLArtifactProcessor.read to
first look at extensions and if not found try with the name of the
file ? So the principle is - search for processors either by
extensions or by the file name for specific kind of documents. I sort
of feel a bit clumsy about
Yes Luciano, that's what I am suggesting.
- Venkat
On 8/8/07, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could we extend the logic in ExtensibleURLArtifactProcessor.read to
first look at extensions and if not found try with the name of the
file ? So the principle is - search for processors
Hi,
Now that I have the basic policy model in place I am trying to link
up this with the assembly model now.
The policy intents and policy sets applicable for a domain are defined
in the definitions.xml. There is a SCADefinitions processor that
deals with reading and resolving the intents and
