On Sep 17, 2010, at 2:04 AM, Arjun Dhar wrote: > > @Brian - > > "but there's a lot of fragmented development and not a lot of investment > going back in." > --- yes, this is what I sense. I'm not even aware of the Brix community > unlike Wicket which is more active. If you see the Brix architecture page i > put some comments but Looks pretty dead which is pretty de-motivating.
One of the seeds that is missing from Brix is a good understanding of how things work internally. Often, the people who can learn it with no documentation are such experienced programmers that they are either too busy with everyone asking them for something or they are not very good communicators (preferring to write more code). Both of these mean when people learn how Brix works, it doesn't often translate into good code. > > "I would challenge you to create needs in the core by demonstrating those > needs" > --- No, I dont think the core needs to be changed as such, Simple is better > & should remain preserved. However we can upgrade the Wicket dependencies > from time to time? :) ?! Hehe, yes. The last time I looked for Jackrabbit in http://mvnrepository.com, it was still at 2.0.0, now it seems there are two newer versions in there. What I will do is do a release on what's in there, then go ahead and upgrade the dependencies on trunk so people can see if they like them. I think we should release that too after people have had some time with it. I would propose we start acting like an Apache project and taking votes on releases. > I ALSO like the idea it does NOT have a custom workflow etc built into core, > coz I'm a fan of Drools work flow & Rules Engines to allocate business logic > and workflows; Apache Camel & Spring Integration. I'm also a fan of these projects, so I would *personally* have no problem integrating them, but we can't even collectively agree that OSGi is a good thing, so I'm sure that frameworks like these would never be unanimously received. :-) On the other hand, abstracted interfaces with default implementations... that would be great. > > "If you are worried about people having access to your assets" > --- No sir, the more the merrier. I'd love to get into it once i'm sure to > commit time & effort. > > From a "using for commercial web sites" perspective, issue is from a UI > perspective the Admin module has a poor finish compared to Alfresco and say > Hippo; its not just the CSS but the general layout sucks. ...I cant sell a > website & present that to the customer without significant effort. Something > I can look to contribute on. I appreciate that. But to defend whomever did that work, I don't design sites very well myself. Maybe we could covert things to use a vertical accordion or something. That's what I'm doing for my internal sites anyway... > > thank you. > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Java-in-CMS-arena-wicket-to-lead-the-way-tp2541542p2543378.html > Sent from the Users forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
