[vote] Forrestizing Cocoon and more

[Stefano Mazzocchi]

As I think most of the people here knows, Forrest is a Cocoon spin-off 
project that focuses on static-snapshots of publishing-intensive web 
sites with complex needs.

Cocoon now self-generates its own static website, but given the amount 
of time/effort/energy that has gone into Forrest since it was created, I 
think it only makes sense if Cocoon moves its documentation system onto 
forrest.

Here are the pro/cons:

- CON: potential disruptive transition period: this means that until 
forrestization is done, people might not be able to generate docs out of 
CVS.

- CON: circular dependency: cocoon will depend on forrest and forrest 
will depend on cocoon.

NOTE: the circular dependency is on the whole process but *NOT* on code! 
There is no code in cocoon that depends on code in Forrest and this will 
never happen! So, there is no circular dependency issue if we separate 
completely code compilation with documentation production. As it will be 
done with Gump and Forrestbot doing different tasks.

- PRO: more modern and actively maintained skin/sitemap/tuned-cocoon.xconf

- PRO: out-of-the-box print-friendlyness (removes the need for a special 
printer-docs target in our build system)

- PRO: potential future integration with inline-editing solutions that 
would ease the passage to the 'holy grail' structured-wiki concept.

- PRO: easy integration with forrestbot, thus: easy (and fast!) inverted 
web publishing.

The only potentially annoying thing is the fact that Forrest and Cocoon 
might get out of synch, thus forcing us to ship a special cocoon.jar 
*inside* our distribution so that forrest is happy about generating our 
docs.

But I think that once we have Gump running and as long as the two 
communities are so responsive to one another, I think this is not going 
to happen, but will rather force both communities to work in synch.

                                    - o -

This said, here are the actions you should vote:

 1) cocoon moves to forrest for its documentation production

 2) if so, cocoon does it before releasing 2.1

 3) if so, I'd like a 'fast-yet-potentially-disruptive' move rather 
than a 'slow-yet-carefully-planned-not-to-disrupt-anything' one.

I vote +1 to all three. And I also volunteer to help.

Please, place your vote.

Stefano.