I too see a widening gap between development and the user base. It seemed as though, when 2.2 came out, those who knew how it worked had already lost interest in it and were in hot pursuit of 3.0. 2.1 (where most of the users were, and perhaps still are) was left twisting slowly in the wind.
2.1 documentation is thin, but 2.2's is worse than none at all: one loses hours following circles of links thinking, "there must be something here *somewhere*!" Asking questions is good, but there's no reward for the behavior when the only answer is "try 3.0." It's clear that a number of folks feel abandoned, and few will talk when they think no one is listening. There's nothing wrong with improving the product, and the changes in Cocoon make sense. (I can't name any other user of the Avalon framework with the same significance as Cocoon -- and the Avalon documentation is tremendously frustrating too. There are a gazillion books on Spring.) But without *thorough, complete* documentation and just plain attention to older versions, there's no bridge from where many of us are to where Cocoon stands today. Using Maven makes sense, but there's a problem too, because Maven is also woefully under-documented. So the build process becomes a mystery wrapped in an enigma. OK, theoretically there's less need to build Cocoon 2.2+; in practice there's a very great need to apply a number of patches that should have gone into a 2.2.1 long ago, and then debug further. -- Mark H. Wood, Lead System Programmer [email protected] Balance your desire for bells and whistles with the reality that only a little more than 2 percent of world population has broadband. -- Ledford and Tyler, _Google Analytics 2.0_
pgpMzMYi57k4v.pgp
Description: PGP signature
