On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 09:21, Matthew Langham wrote:
...
> 
> 1. Are you currently using the Cocoon Portal Framework? 
> 
> A) Yes we are using it for ... 

..an application I'm not allowed to talk about. It has sth. to do with
online auctions and ERP systems....

> B) No we are not, but currently considering it 
> C) No, we are using commercial alternative xyz 

In another project we use IBM Websphere Portal Server, which is quite
nice integrated with Eclipse (WSAD) in version 5.0 and 5.1. It hides
lots of things you need to hand do in Cocoon portal, but hey, the Portal
Server is soo expensive (several hundred thousand Euros in the
enterprise version)

> D) No, we are using Open Source alternative xyz 

> E) We don't currently need a portal 
> 
> The following questions only if you are using a portal 
> 
> 2. Why did you choose the specific portal solution you are using?
> 
> A) Given IT strategy 

IBM Websphere Portal Server, because the customer wants it so much.

> B) Cost 

Cocoon

> C) Technology 
> D) No real alternative 
> E) Don't know 
> F) Other reason (please add)
> 
> The following questions only if you are using the Cocoon Portal framework 
> 
> 3. Why did you choose the Cocoon portal framework?

Low cost and atm some more possibilities for customization I do not have
using IBM PS since of its closed source.

> 
> A) We were already using Cocoon 

Yes (redundant question)

> B) A strategic decision was made to use Open Source 



> C) Because of the features of the framework 

true for one project

> D) Don't know 
> E) Other reason (please add) 
> 
> 4. What do you think is currently missing from the Portal framework?
> 
> A) Tools (which?) or tool support

* Eclipse integration in several ways:
 - Adding removing portlets to/from pages
 - Configure pages and their layouts
 - Wizard for new portlets depending on the impl. e.g. Cocoon sitemap
struts etc,
 - Wizard for creating a new Portal

Some of the above point can also be achieved by the running protal
itself.


> B) WSRP support 
> C) Better JSR168 integration 

Nice but not needed atm. imho : There isn't a good JCR 168 impl. we
could use.

> D) Better Documentation 

Can never hurt :)

> E) Other (please add)
> 
> 5. How do you get support for the framework 
> 
> A) Through the mailing lists 

Yes

> B) Reading the documentation and other publications 

Yes

> C) We are Cocoon portal gurus 

Almost :)

> D) We get external help 
> E) Other (please add)
> 
> 6. Details/Comments (Optional) 
> Please feel free to add any details you think may be of interest 

Sorry for not going into details....no time atm.

-- 
Rolf Kulemann


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to