> Thanks for the comments; I
am still not sure I
> understand or agree with the
"proprietary" code part;
> my definition (based around
ownership) seemingly disagrees
> with yours - we will then
obviously disagree about the
> implications...
For purposes of evaluating information
technologies I consider a technology proprietary if it is only available from a
single source (or perhaps a closed consortium). Eg. an AS/400 is proprietary a
PC is not, MS Excel is proprietary, spreadsheets, in general, are not.
When a technology happens to be an Open
Source project your concerns are probably less than if the source was an obscure
vendor with minimal revenues. None-the-less many Open Source initiatives
have withered on the vine in the past.
As I've also implied, it's not just an issue
of long term support; portability can be an issue. The other issue is the
cost of acquisition: when something is available from multiple sources it there
is competition to drive down prices (not a concern with Open Source) and
competition to include features (including good documentation
:-)...
However, all this is just incidental to the
reason for my original response: the fact remains that you don't need XSP to
write a major Cocoon application...
