> IMO the "official" way should be the way that works. So if marker comments are a way to solve the problem, let's make it the official way and fix the faces config! > > Sylvain
Of course, anything that works is better than something broken. But I felt that these anchor comments cannot be the proper way, so I did some research. We could use JAXB instead. WDYT? Would anyone consider this an overkill? It would be very clean and very state of the art. Regards, Torsten Sylvain Wallez schrieb: > Torsten Schlabach wrote: > >> Hi! >> I hope I haven't overlooked this in the archives. But the thread that sounded promising at first >> (http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg35223.html) had little to do with the info I was looking for. >> I am trying to pick up the CHS petstore example (Cocoon, Hibernate, Spring) from http://www.cocoondev.org/main/117/43.html with the latest release of Cocoon (2.1.8), but I am having a hard time getting this to work. >> Following the comments on that CHS example page it turns out that one of >> the problems is that this block needs to add a couple of entries to the web.xml file, such as a context-parameter, a listener, a filter and a filter-mapping. >> Jetty applies a strict DTD to web.xml, therefore the order of elements matters. (Other than Tomcat by default, were you can mix them in whatever >> order you want.) >> There is a mechanism described in the comments that uses tags hidden in XML comments in Cocoons web.xml file in src/webapp/WEB-INF/web.xml as a sort of anchors to direct XPatch to put the additional elements in the rights positions in the final web.xml file. >> Pretty creative approach, and it works fine. The only problem being that >> other blocks (faces!) that also add stuff to web.xml don't use that mechanism but just use absolut positioning of their additions (i.e. "put >> that listener right in front"), thus leaving no change to but for example >> and context-parameter elements before that listener. >> The problem can be circumvented by disabling the faces block in my case, >> but it leaves me with the question: Is that mechanism of using comments to >> insert fragments into the right position in web.xml sort of the official >> Cocoon way. Or is there no official way because that problem never showed >> up so far? >> If it is the official way, should I file a bug for the faces block? >> > > > IMO the "official" way should be the way that works. So if marker comments are a way to solve the problem, let's make it the official way and fix the faces config! > > Sylvain >
