Reinhard Poetz pisze:
>
> We at Indoqa have started to think about working on a slimmed down
> version of Cocoon 2.2 ("Micro-Cocoon"). By doing this we pursue a couple
> of goals:
>
<snip what="obviously supported by me goals"/>
> o aspect-oriented profiling of pipelines
Could you elaborate on this? I may not know all fashionable terminology. :-)
> o build upon the servlet-service-framework so that this reduced version
> can be run in parallel with a 2.2 application (in order to save already
> made investments)
Good idea and should be quite easy to achieve this goal.
> o reduce the dependencies to external libraries to a minimum
I'm sure Maven will help us with that greatly.
> o sitemaps as Spring bean definitions (mid-term goal)
Can you explain what do you mean by that? I'm very confused...
> o pull pipelines (long-term goal)
>
> In order to reach these goals we want to start off with existing code,
> but then continue with removing
>
> o all dependencies on Avalon/Excalibur
> o the support for sub-sitemaps (no map:mount)
> o the support for sitemap-level components (no map:components)
> o the support for the cocoon-protocol
> o map:resource
> o map:view
It's not going to be surprise to anyone that I agree wholeheartedly with all
points above.
> Having said this, I want to mention that, for us, the Micro-Cocoon
> effort is a feasability study, that we will conduct over the next 8
> weeks. However, in order to make it not only based on theoretical
> assumptions, we also want to touch code. Since we think that this might
> be of interest for others too, we would like to work into a public
> repository, preferably the Cocoon whiteboard.
I agree that touching the code is highly recommended but I wonder how it's
going to work. Achieving
most of the goals above will demand touching deepest core of the Cocoon and
it's going to
destabilize it for sure. If more people start to commit big changes I feat we
will end up with
not-working, complete disaster.
It may be that I'm just too young committer and I don't remember how C1.0 ->
C2.0 transition has
been managed.
Do you have a good plan ? :)
> We have also invited Grek who will come to Vienna for a couple of days
> and will support us with his expertise. Based on the result of the
> study, we will decide if/how we will continue.
I'm very pleased about the fact that Reinhard representing Indoqa company
invited me to Vienna. I
hope to be as much helpful as I can. Moreover, I'm very enthusiastic about
whole idea and I hope it
to be successful.
> I know, that as I'm a Cocoon committer, I'm free to add anything which
> is somehow related to Cocoon to the whiteboard without asking before,
> but in this case I'm not sure about the impact on our community if we
> start off another effort on "improving" Cocoon (2.2 still hasn't reached
> a final release yet).
C2.2 is a really close to final and apart from few quite serious bugs I think
it is stable and very
usable. All in all, we need to think it over what to do next.
> Is it a good idea to use the Cocoon whiteboard? Or shall we go to
> Sourceforge, Apache Labs, or even do it only internally? etc.
> I highly appreciate your comments on the proposal itself as well as on
> the setting. Thanks.
I'm biased as I'm somehow involved in whole proposal so you can treat my
comments lightly. I'm very
interested in others opinions too.
I think that provided we get enough community interest the initiative should
stay here and we should
work in whiteboard. The worst thing would be that you started to work on
Miro-Cocoon in a secret so
other interested people couldn't join the effort.
--
Grzegorz Kossakowski (highly excited)
