Although I think it would be nice to sync with the Rhino cvs, I can tell you from personal experience that the Rhino code at cocoondev.org is more stable than Cocoon itself at this point.
Please understand that my point is not about stability: I'm positive about the current Rhino being rock solid. I don't know how many of the ~60 bugs listed on the 1.5R4 page at Mozilla are still in the version we're using (I assume very few given that ours is a pre-release).
My concern is about evolution:
1. ECMAScript is continuously being updated, and that if we want flow to stand the evolution we need to be able to follow the Rhino track, or users will not be able to leverage the new features;
2. Rhino itself is being updated: for us server side developers, I think that the new security architecture, integrated with the Java security model, is intriguing to say the least. I also don't know how much having the deprecated WrapHandler instead than the new WrapFactory is hurting us, but I would for sure feel more comfortable if we were able to leverage the latest efforts from the (agreed, small, but this might always change) Rhino community.
This is why I don't consider only nice to be in sync and integrated, I much rather consider it quite important. Most probably the real issue is timeline: do we expect Javascript based flow to be a technology that last for a few months or several years?
So I think trying to place the blame on Rhino for not using the flow is misguided.
You know, I know, and almost everyone here knows. But this might not be the case for the Cocoon user who's building a mission critical application. Competition is tough, out there. :-)
Ciao,
-- Gianugo Rabellino Pro-netics s.r.l. - http://www.pro-netics.com Orixo, the XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com (Now blogging at: http://blogs.cocoondev.org/gianugo/)
