on 5/14/03 1:24 AM Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > I absolutely agree with the above - so this will be an interesting time ;)
Ok, super cool. If we all agree on this line of action, this makes things much easier for me. >>As soon as Cocoon 2.1 is out of the door I'll start working on it, >>either as a branch or in the scratchpad. > > > Count me in - you know, when you convienced me last year that blocks are > really cool (= a feature with hugh impact on the way of building > applications > etc), I tried from time to time to start an implementation, but never came > further than some minor concepts for the implementation. > This 2.1 release has cost a lot of man-power, so we must get it out > the door to start the blocks. *absolutely*!! I already did a mess by rewriting the build system (even if it had proven to be very useful to kick back some momentum in the community!) and I will probably have to do it again in the future because blocks change the very inner structure of the core (even if the CVS module restructuring was done with 'real blocks' in mind and this will remain solid) >>Write that little docs and make Berin happy. This is, after all, a step >>that cannot possibly hurt. >> > > Although the components are not from me and I might not be the perfect > fit to write the docs, I still have this point on my todo list as noone > else seems to be willing to write those docs. But it has really a very > very low priority right now - I'm trying to raise this priority and > perhaps I can come up in the next weeks with some docs. Perhaps someone > else is faster :) Look: open source is about having fun and go with the community. if you feel like doing it, do it, if not, don't. You having fun is *MUCH* more important than any stinking doc. ;-) > (Then I would owe that guy a beer) > (The weeking is already occupied with testing my new apple 17inch powerbook > that arrived finally on monday uh! welcome aboard. pretty soon, a geek who doesn't own a powerbook will be looked as "what's wrong with you" attitude :-) [isn't is to, Andy? ;-)] > and as I'm not at home is still lying > there and waiting for me, then I have to install my small 'home theater' and > have to put all the cables, speakers etc at the correct places in my > living room and have to take care that my wife is still pleased with > the result :) ah, that will be hardest part of all ;-) > and the new DSL router has arrived waiting to be installed > as well, so...) > > >>I changed my mind: let the components remain there and let's work on >>getting the release out of the door so that I can work on blocks and >>free cocoon (and all of us!) from the chains of the servlet container :-) >> >>Deal? >> > > Deal! Good. > Ehmm...but...I prepared the following text minutes before a read your > reply, so I have to put it here as well: > >>>prepared text<< > > Ok, after sleeping over this topic (well, if you can tell a 4 hour > sleep after some discussions and a few beers with Giacomo, Pier, > Massimo and some others "sleep"), I have made up my mind and > want to revert my -1. > > Thinking about it, moving things etc. is not the real > problem for me, but package renaming is an incompatible change. > So what do you think about keeping the avalon package names, *if* we > move the components back to cocoon. Yes, I was going to suggest that. This will require special permission from the avalon PMC (just to make sure everybody agrees), but we can ask that. > So we don't have incompatible changes and could possibly move > them back in one year if it makes sense by that time (just a silly idea). I doubt so. >>>end prepared text<< > > But as we have our deal, we just keep everything as it is, add > some docs and see what happens. > Then we throw 2.1 out of the doors, implement this blocks thing > and will have an even more rocking release lying under the > christmas tree :) > Sounds great to me! Cool. As a sidenote, I managed to infect Ricardo back with all the memes about flow, blocks, DHTML, mozilla, software darwinism and more. He's so excited that he can't even sleep at night (I'm serious!). Knowing him, I wouldn't be surprised if I wake up tomorrow and he wrote the whole block architecture and deployment manager :-) But anyway, this will happen post 2.1 so let's get going. -- Stefano.
