Re: [vote] Cocoon 3.0
Alfred Nathaniel wrote:
On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 13:19 +0200, Reinhard Pötz wrote:
Following the result of our recent discussion about the future of
Corona, I propose Corona to become Cocoon 3.
This means that any reference on Corona in source files, package names,
artifact ids, group ids or anywhere else will be dropped and the
standard Cocoon namespace org.apache.cocoon will be used.
This majority vote stays open for 72 hours.
Please cast your votes.
Here is my +1
-1
I think it is much too early to proclaim a tiny blossom like Corona to
be the heir to the huge thicket called Cocoon. It gives the wrong
signal to potential new users and will make them shy away.
They will read it as: Oh, they are now working on C3.0. So C2.2 will
be legacy by the time my project is finished. I may be forced to
migrate to 3.0 with lots of incompatibilities. Better I use some other
framework for now.
That doesn't make sense. Then this user would have to migrate from the
'other framework' sometime which is most probably more difficult.
I'll have another look when C3.1 is out.
At least that was my personal reaction when in 1999 I first came across
Cocoon. I never bothered with C1.7 because C2.0 was already announced
as being a complete rewrite. Luckily, I passed by a second time in 2002
when C2.1 was in beta state.
Evolution instead of revolution is the key to success here.
C2.2 almost killed us because it was very bold and then took very long
to get out due to the feature creep during the long time it took to get
out. Porting stuff forward and backward between C2.1 and C2.2 did and
does cost a lot of resources. I would not want to throw in there yet
another branch.
There is no need to port things between 2.x and Corona - there is only a
very minimal overlap.
Before considering C3.0 we should have finished the C2.1 to C2.2
transition period. And that is not achieved by simply declaring the
C2.1 branch to be closed. For that I would like to hear more success
stories where people actually migrated non-trivial apps from C2.1 to
C2.2.
sure, I'd like to hear them too.
I don't want to stand in the way of progress here. Please carry on with
Corona and stay within the Cocoon context but just don't call to
Cocoon-x.y.
After 25 days of discussion this was the best solution we found. People
were very unhappy with the use of any codename. And meanwhile I think we
are all tired of the name finding game.
Cocoon 3 will be announced as alpha software. We will add warning
messages to all release artifacts and on the homepage that the code is
experimental and contracts can change from patch releases. We will also
state clearly that the focus of Cocoon 3 is much smaller (small pipeline
API RESTful webservices) and that, thanks to the servlet-service
framework, it can be run very easily in parallel with Cocoon 2.2
Wasn't the original motivation for Corona to have a
programmable pipeline container which can be used independently of
Cocoon?
The original motivation was that Cocoon 2.x code is one of the most
difficult pieces of software that I've ever seen. We tried to refactor
it (see 'Micro-Cocoon' in the whiteboard) but found out that this is
everything else than simple. While doing this I wondered wow many people
do really understand how the environment handling exactly works and can
do changes without a long trial and error period?
Maybe stupid question: Why can't it be a set of experimental blocks in
trunk which may lateron replace the current sitemap processor?
It's not only the sitemap processor. Corona also has different contracts
at pipeline and pipeline component level.
--
Reinhard Pötz Managing Director, {Indoqa} GmbH
http://www.indoqa.com/en/people/reinhard.poetz/
Member of the Apache Software Foundation
Apache Cocoon Committer, PMC member [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[summary][vote] Cocoon 3.0
Reinhard Pötz wrote:
Following the result of our recent discussion about the future of
Corona, I propose Corona to become Cocoon 3.
This means that any reference on Corona in source files, package names,
artifact ids, group ids or anywhere else will be dropped and the
standard Cocoon namespace org.apache.cocoon will be used.
This majority vote stays open for 72 hours.
Please cast your votes.
Here is my +1
During the voting period there were 12 +1 votes and one negative one.
This means that the proposal was accepted.
For further discussion I will be sending a message to this list that
describes proposed changes (package name changes, groupId/artifactId,
versioning, Jira, SVN move, etc.).
--
Reinhard Pötz Managing Director, {Indoqa} GmbH
http://www.indoqa.com/en/people/reinhard.poetz/
Member of the Apache Software Foundation
Apache Cocoon Committer, PMC member [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [summary][vote] Cocoon 3.0
On Aug 10, 2008, at 4:19 AM, Reinhard Pötz wrote: Reinhard Pötz wrote: Following the result of our recent discussion about the future of Corona, I propose Corona to become Cocoon 3. This means that any reference on Corona in source files, package names, artifact ids, group ids or anywhere else will be dropped and the standard Cocoon namespace org.apache.cocoon will be used. This majority vote stays open for 72 hours. Please cast your votes. Here is my +1 During the voting period there were 12 +1 votes and one negative one. What about Alfred's -1 vote? Vadim
Re: [summary][vote] Cocoon 3.0
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
On Aug 10, 2008, at 4:19 AM, Reinhard Pötz wrote:
Reinhard Pötz wrote:
Following the result of our recent discussion about the future of
Corona, I propose Corona to become Cocoon 3.
This means that any reference on Corona in source files, package
names, artifact ids, group ids or anywhere else will be dropped and
the standard Cocoon namespace org.apache.cocoon will be used.
This majority vote stays open for 72 hours.
Please cast your votes.
Here is my +1
During the voting period there were 12 +1 votes and one negative one.
What about Alfred's -1 vote?
During the voting period there were 12 +1 votes and one negative one.
^^^
--
Reinhard Pötz Managing Director, {Indoqa} GmbH
http://www.indoqa.com/en/people/reinhard.poetz/
Member of the Apache Software Foundation
Apache Cocoon Committer, PMC member [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [summary][vote] Cocoon 3.0
On Aug 10, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Reinhard Pötz wrote: Vadim Gritsenko wrote: On Aug 10, 2008, at 4:19 AM, Reinhard Pötz wrote: Reinhard Pötz wrote: Following the result of our recent discussion about the future of Corona, I propose Corona to become Cocoon 3. This means that any reference on Corona in source files, package names, artifact ids, group ids or anywhere else will be dropped and the standard Cocoon namespace org.apache.cocoon will be used. This majority vote stays open for 72 hours. Please cast your votes. Here is my +1 During the voting period there were 12 +1 votes and one negative one. What about Alfred's -1 vote? During the voting period there were 12 +1 votes and one negative one. ^^^ Oops read it as 'no negative ones' - sorry :) Vadim
[jira] Created: (COCOON-2233) Update archetypes to current trunk artifact versions
Update archetypes to current trunk artifact versions Key: COCOON-2233 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COCOON-2233 Project: Cocoon Issue Type: Task Components: - Build System: Maven Affects Versions: 2.2-dev (Current SVN) Reporter: Mark Lundquist Patch updates artifact versions in cocoon archetypes to the current trunk versions. * Also adds BlockDeploymentServletContextListener to web.xml in the webapp archetype as required in trunk. * Some cosmetic cleanup as well -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Updated: (COCOON-2233) Update archetypes to current trunk artifact versions
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COCOON-2233?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Mark Lundquist updated COCOON-2233: --- Attachment: PATCH-2233 Update archetypes to current trunk artifact versions Key: COCOON-2233 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COCOON-2233 Project: Cocoon Issue Type: Task Components: - Build System: Maven Affects Versions: 2.2-dev (Current SVN) Reporter: Mark Lundquist Attachments: PATCH-2233 Patch updates artifact versions in cocoon archetypes to the current trunk versions. * Also adds BlockDeploymentServletContextListener to web.xml in the webapp archetype as required in trunk. * Some cosmetic cleanup as well -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
Re: [jira] Created: (COCOON-2233) Update archetypes to current trunk artifact versions
On Aug 10, 2008, at 8:59 PM, Mark Lundquist (JIRA) wrote: Update archetypes to current trunk artifact versions Key: COCOON-2233 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COCOON-2233 Project: Cocoon Issue Type: Task Components: - Build System: Maven Affects Versions: 2.2-dev (Current SVN) Reporter: Mark Lundquist Patch updates artifact versions in cocoon archetypes to the current trunk versions. * Also adds BlockDeploymentServletContextListener to web.xml in the webapp archetype as required in trunk. * Some cosmetic cleanup as well I would also suggest that the cocoon-22-archetype-* Maven projects be renamed to just cocoon-archetype-*. I think it is confusing having the 22 in there. Is there a reason it has to be there? cheers, —ml— smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [vote] Release of servlet-service-impl-1.1.0, spring-configurator-2.0.0, jnet-1.0.0, block-deployment-1.0.0, cocoon-maven-plugin-1.0.0-M3
David Crossley wrote: Reinhard P?tz wrote: Currently the proposed artifacts can only be tested either with latest trunk or Corona. Actual testing is beyond me. You can find the staged files for all modules (sources, binaries, javadocs, checksums, gpg signatures) at I verified all checksums for *.tar.gz and random ones for jars. My gpg is broken at the moment, so not done. Fixed it. Now i have verified that the signatures are okay. -David Unpacked, and manually looked at license file and file headers. Not tried RAT. Did my other usual checks. +1 from me. -David
