Howdy, > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Robert Koberg wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Christoph Henrici wrote: > > > > > > > > I have been studying, testing and playing around with cocoon in the > > > > last few days as a newcomer : i am greatly impressed with what ease with > > > > cocoon "pipelines" arbrary data sources can be "chained" to a result > > > > target: a very powerful paradigm (pipe) applied in a powerful context > > > > (http) by using great technology (xml, xlst). > > > > > > Yep, I think you really hit the point. Some people believe that it's > > > enough to add server side transformation capabilities (say, adding a > > > XSLT post-processor as a servlet filter!) to come up with a publishing > > > framework. > > > > I guess I am one of those :) But I guess you are talking about much broader > > publishing needs. It is all relative. > > Oh, yes. I was not referring to ad-hoc solutions but to who wants to > take a publishing system (say Turbine), add an XML transformation > language on top (say DVSL*) and voila': who needs Cocoon? > > (*) http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/dvsl/index.html > > > I have not used cocoon2 yet. I had very bad experiences adopting cocoon1 > > (right when it came out -- MacMillan's idiotsguides.com - god, I wish I > > could take that one back :( for many things besides cocoon's PIs - my first > > "real" web-site...). When I understand what I needed (too late) I realized > > that cocoon was the furthest thing. I am hoping to gather this info about > > cocoon2 from you guys (and maybe throw my 2cents in every now and then :). > > It sounds like you have a fantastic product. I would have installed it to > > play around with but all the other things you need... Then again, all the > > buzz makes it very interesting. > > I've talked with many people that were scared away by Cocoon1. No excuse > there: it was a first try and a pretty home-made one. But considering > that the XML model is not yet finished, the XML spec is 4 years old and > Cocoon is 3 years old, I think that we did have a good excuse to try > things out. I jumped on board and really loved the ideas. It got me thinking in this direction so I am very appreciative of that - thanks! > > Cocoon2 is an industrial-quality product, both in design and > implementation. Ignoring for past experiences is not only blind, is > plain stupid. I know, that is why I am here listening (mostly :). Some things I like, some I don't. Are you calling me stupid? :) > > At the same time, Cocoon1 is *still* used in heavy loaded production > sites and makes me think that if such a limited architecture could reach > that point, what will we do with Cocoon2? > > I'm so excited to see this :) > > > I wonder if cocoon is bloatware, at least for my needs. > > Cocoon includes many things and, granted, more that you need. It's more > or less like PHP but with more modern design concepts (not that PHP is > not modern, it's very cool indeed!, but lacks the concept of SoC right > into the HTML+script design concept!). > > And for sure it's big: it is reaching the point where we have more java > code in Cocoon than in the entire JDK! and that sums up to hundreds of > thousands of lines of code!!! and written in a few years! Apache has > more productivity of good quality java code than Sun itself! > > And if that was not enough, the community is one of the most active and, > even better, it seems to be magnetically attracting other efforts as > well (FOP, Batik, XIndice, POI, DELI) and triggering lots of > cross-pollination in beween the ASF efforts (avalon, xalan, gump, > forrest). > > > When working with a > > small team (say 5-10 people spread out all over the world, well, US and > > England) servlets and xslt/xml seem to do everything I need. > > Hey, if that works for you, great. But the fact that you stick around > here seems to suggest that you find our input useful. So, I would > suggest not to discard the software that was distilled after that input > :) Oh, I'm not. I am just being more careful this time. Once bitten, twice shy. > > > They work on > > it dynamicially and then generate it as a static site whenever they want. > > And I would bet there are few people who can create a large content-based > > site faster. > > Never say never. I never did :) > > > My sites (large publishing companies) are perhaps well-suited > > to this though and other sites are perhaps better suited to cocoon. > > > > Why scoff something that works? > > Why is it a bad thing? > > Never said that. never say never :) OK > > My only point is: how do you know if your stuff is any better than > cocoon2 since you didn't even try it? I just downloaded it about an hour or two ago. best, -Rob --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
