Hi Nico,

I think I understand how you would like the see the core. I think it
can be a wise choice to move in that direction. But when I read your
document it makes me feel like MMBase is very much like a database.
Only this one really is missing serious features like transactions.
Back in the day's I started hacking MMBase I wanted to add behaviour
to a whole cloud(versioning,security,replication). This is why I think
the current "MMObjectBuilder" core should move and become more bridge
like. I don't think that is what you are saying in your document. My
grand master plan was to one day implement nodemanager and not
builders. Also with the (good) fieldTypes move, the object orientation
of MMBase is not that necessary any more is it? So what's the great
selling point, Why not build a content repository from scratch?

I don't really have a vision for MMBase but I still keep using it.

why
-I like the way it's possible to create object models
-I like the way it's possible changes the object models on the go
-I like that there is at least one editor that works
-I like the time savers (images,jumpers,modules,full backup)

what I would like
-better support for saving object models and data
-better support for cloud morphing
-better support for pojo's/code generation

I hope this "helps"

greetings
_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/developers

Reply via email to