More people will choose MMBase if the core is mean and lean and a broad
range of addons are available (as described in eg. the CMS Container
proposal). If the developer community doesn't start growing fast,
combined with the availability of useful addons, my guess is that it is
too late.
We certainly migrate in that direction, which I do like. There are several
adons available, even in the mmbase CVS.
If you agree on the direction, lets elaborate on the goal. And then
reconsider the direction to the goal.
It must not become a dogma though. A simple utility class is not an addon;
it's a utility, and it can't hurt to ship it it, IMHO.
In this discussion architecture should be the dogma. We need
architecture, we need vision, we need The Big Plan. After that we can
discuss the simple utility classes.
Regards, Zoran
FWIW:
Generic utility classes (such as escaping functions) should be
maintained elsewhere. There are people working on that at e.g.
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/. Lets use that.
For specific implementations (e.g. sitestat) make it an addon with
additional functionality. You can hack your sitestat code directly in
e.g. templates, but you can also let an addon take care of it. That way
it can be reused and improved by others.
MMBase core specific utility classes should of course be part of the core.
_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
