There is no real need to move ... totally agree.  But once you become familiar 
with 
- agile development
- unit-testing  (junit & spring-test)
- dependency injection (Spring)
- AOP
- Cocoon-spring-configurator
- reloading class loader (RCL)

You might finally see the benefits from switching to newer versions.

I've been working completely solo for the past 2 years on several Cocoon 
modules (which could be compared with 1 application) and most of the times I 
can show incremental results using 1 week iterations. I do small new released 
and receive immediate feedback from the customer.

I actually have been combining/integrating
- YUI2.7 -> YUI3 
- Xstream
- Axis
- Quartz Job scheduler
- ...
into my modules without much difficulties and that's due to the complete new 
set of technologies at hand.

If there is a real need to get some real live use case  (instead of hellow 
world) elaborated I'm more than happy to contribute to a demo application which 
can be checked out to view the sources and explain step-by-step how you can 
setup your cocoon-app.

Anybody who has a nice suggestion?

Robby


-----Original Message-----
From: André Davignon [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 11:51 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Lowering in amount of users' posts?

Hi all,

Remember :

Putting "Based on Maven and Spring" on your homepage sounds much better 
at the moment than "Based on Ant and Avalon" 
(http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox//cocoon-users/200902.mbox/%[email protected]%3e).

Who cares ?

And what about XSP ? Which was a fast and reliable way to build webapps. 
Remember "XSP is evil" (just find out the post ;-) ).
As pointed out, there seems to be a real gap between real world needs and 
developpers' wishes to create the silver bullet (take a look at the google 
cache).

No need to move to Cocoon 2 ou 3 or 10, other frameworks do the job. Or come 
back to Jsp / servlets

Best wishes,

André



> Ok.
>
> I have to agree on the documentation issue.  This certainly hasn't approved 
> and for usage of sitemap components I still tend to use the Cocoon2.1.x docs. 
>  
>
> I do believe as well that Cocoon forms in combination with flowscript was 
> state of the art back then but other frameworks are doing an equally good or 
> even better job nowadays. 
>
> Cocoon is still my preferred tool to do xml transformations but if you want 
> to build highly dynamic interactive webapps you might as well take a look 
> around for other available options.  But this is where Cocoon3.0 comes into 
> play...
>
> Instead of building your complete webapp with the Cocoon framework you can 
> now choose your preferred framework (GWT, Wicket, -> 
> http://java-source.net/open-source/web-frameworks ) and outsource the xml 
> stuff to Cocoon3 by just using the Java API.  Also check out Reinhard's 
> effort for howto  
> http://cocoon.apache.org/3.0/reference/html-single/index.html#wicket-integration
>
> And I expect I'll make the switch to Cocoon3 over the next year because of 
> this reason.
>
> On the other hand the first implementations of XPROC are available which 
> resembles a lot what cocoon has to offer...    
>
> Cheers,
> Robby
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andre Juffer [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 10:45 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Lowering in amount of users' posts?
>
> I pretty much agree with what Robby just wrote. There are certain 
> differences of course between Cocoon 2.2 and earlier versions, which may 
> be somewhat difficult to grasp. Maven is a standard build tool and it is 
> well supported by Netbeans and other similar tools. It is easy to 
> construct an cocoon application with Netbeans. Also, the use of Spring 
> is a logical choice. It would takes a few days to learn, but it is worth 
> the effort. If you already know Cocoon 2.1, the switch to Cocoon 2.2 is 
> not really hard (again, takes a few days). All in all, as Robby 
> indicated, it may take you a week or so to convert to C2.2.
>
> The only concern I have is the level of documentation in C2.2 and also 
> C3. On the other hand, some of documentation that was already available 
> under Cocoon 2.1 that is also applicable to C2.2 (like 
> flowscript/jxtemplate) could (should) have been transferred to C2.2.
>
> I wish the development of cocoon 2.2 or cocoon 3 would continue. With 
> the recent emphasis on RESTful web services, I believe that cocoon 2.2 / 
> 3 could become a major player in that direction. All the tools one would 
> require for a RESTful web application are essentially available. Many 
> representations (Json, XML, txt, etc) of resources can easily be 
> prepared with XSLT. In that respect, I would claim that Cocoon was ahead 
> of its time, because the ability to generate various representations 
> from the same source (usually XML) was always seen as one of Cocoon's 
> strengths. Also, the introduction of blocks in C2.2 is quite compatible 
> with the way of thinking of RESTful URIs.
>
> So, in my opinion, Cocoon is a great tool and we should continue to use 
> it. And we should start ask questions again. Questions means interest 
> and interest stimulates further development.
>
> Best,
> André
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>
>   


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to