I too agree with Robby on a lot of points.
My thoughts on this are that Cocoon 2.1 was sort of getting into it's
maintainance phase where no real functionality was added anymore. There
is already so much functionality in there! As far as I know there are
still many people working with Cocoon 2.1 these days. Cocoon developers
still pick up patches from JIRA and commit them into the 2.1 Branch.
As a project you want to improve and sometimes this means change.
Therefor I think it was a good move to use Spring as a base for Cocoon
2.2. Spring itself has a huge community and it could have attracted a
lot of new people to the Cocoon project. If you already have Spring
knowledge, the learning curve would have been less then it was before.
As a side note I do want to mention that it has never been necessary to
upgrade to 2.2 (at least I have not seen any issues that required me to
move). Cocoon 2.1 is also still supported. If you really want to use
Spring and like the 'blocks' concept you *could* make the switch.
With Cocoon 3 I see an interesting shift in less configuration and more
programming. I personally like this improvement and I know quite some
people that disliked Cocoon 2.1 for it's overhead on XML configuration
files.
In short. I don't think that less activity on the user list means that
people have less interest for Cocoon itself, even though some people
might have moved on to other projects, Cocoon itself is still in use by
a lot of people and if you have any issues please let us know.
Jeroen
On 04/19/2010 10:44 AM, Andre Juffer wrote:
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
Robby Pelssers wrote:
Maybe the learning curve got a bit steeper for Cocoon2.2 but I
disagree that this is inherent to Cocoon itself. Cocoon2.2 still
allows you to do use the sitemap as before and building a complete
webapp with optional usage of
- Flowscript/jxtemplate
- Cocoon forms
- Xslt
- …
without ever having to write a single line of Java.
It took me 1 week to completely make the switch from Cocoon2.1.11 to
Cocoon2.2. And building blocks and wiring them up (dependencies) in
the servlet-context.xml is really simple.
The switch to Maven is a generic tendency seen in all open source
projects, so not only Cocoon…. Who will tell when we all switch to
Craddle (and have to learn yet another build tool and programming
language Groovy).
And the switch from Avalon to Spring was also a complete logical step…
it has become the de facto standard for doing dependency injection and
it comes bundled with a lot of usefull integration classes for most
frameworks (Castor, XStream, Quartz, …) and AOP. And for the ones who
still think the only decent JVM language is Java… think twice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_JVM_languages
If you ask me this discussion is more about people resisting change in
Software development in general because they have to adapt (again) to
new technologies.
Cheers,
Robby Pelssers
*From:* Andreas Kuehne [mailto:[email protected]]
*Sent:* Sunday, April 18, 2010 3:40 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: Lowering in amount of users' posts?
Hi,
for me it's also true :
Didn't see any real need to got to 2.2. or beyond ! 2.1 does anything
for me, huge apps with heavy load as well as quick solutions.
To the major problem of cocoon is : It's ready ! No burning needs for
new functionality, no major tasks on the todo list. Fiddeling with
another base framework ( spring instead of avalon ) or build tool (
maven vs. ant ) doesn't make any user more happy.
I can do what I need any van even impress competitors with speed and
performance. Maintainance mode or not, I'm happy with it !
Greetings
Andreas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
