You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de> on 2004/04/17 20:06:00 UTC
Continue Development of 2.1.x
The development of blocks for 2.2 has started, but as others have
already pointed out, it might take time to get it implemented
and running well.
So, I would suggest that we change our development plan a little
bit and consider adding those features to our 2.1.x code base
that are independent from blocks, like e.g. the virtual sitemap
components etc. Of course we should take care that the
changes are not incompatible (apart from the one below :) ).
WDYT?
In addition I would like to "port back" the changes I made to
the environment handling in 2.2 to 2.1.x as they improve the
performance and clean up some hacks (not all :( ) we have in
the code. And this would also make Leo's wish regarding
the CocoonComponentManager easier. Unfortunately these changes
are not 100% compatible: the o.a.c.Processor and the o.a.c.e.Environment
interfaces have to change for this. But this shouldn't effect
users, so it should be ok to change it.
Is this ok?
As a last note, my rewritten tree processor is growing (it's not
feature complete yet), but I think it is very soon able to process
all features of the sitemap and adding such things like virtual
components shouldn't be that hard (hopefully).
Carsten
Carsten Ziegeler
Open Source Group, S&N AG
http://www.osoco.net/weblogs/rael/
Re: Continue Development of 2.1.x
Posted by Marc Portier <mp...@outerthought.org>.
+1 from me
-marc=
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> The development of blocks for 2.2 has started, but as others have
> already pointed out, it might take time to get it implemented
> and running well.
>
> So, I would suggest that we change our development plan a little
> bit and consider adding those features to our 2.1.x code base
> that are independent from blocks, like e.g. the virtual sitemap
> components etc. Of course we should take care that the
> changes are not incompatible (apart from the one below :) ).
>
> WDYT?
>
> In addition I would like to "port back" the changes I made to
> the environment handling in 2.2 to 2.1.x as they improve the
> performance and clean up some hacks (not all :( ) we have in
> the code. And this would also make Leo's wish regarding
> the CocoonComponentManager easier. Unfortunately these changes
> are not 100% compatible: the o.a.c.Processor and the o.a.c.e.Environment
> interfaces have to change for this. But this shouldn't effect
> users, so it should be ok to change it.
> Is this ok?
>
> As a last note, my rewritten tree processor is growing (it's not
> feature complete yet), but I think it is very soon able to process
> all features of the sitemap and adding such things like virtual
> components shouldn't be that hard (hopefully).
>
> Carsten
>
> Carsten Ziegeler
> Open Source Group, S&N AG
> http://www.osoco.net/weblogs/rael/
>
--
Marc Portier http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/mpo/
mpo@outerthought.org mpo@apache.org
Re: Continue Development of 2.1.x
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> The development of blocks for 2.2 has started, but as others have
> already pointed out, it might take time to get it implemented
> and running well.
>
> So, I would suggest that we change our development plan a little
> bit and consider adding those features to our 2.1.x code base
> that are independent from blocks, like e.g. the virtual sitemap
> components etc. Of course we should take care that the
> changes are not incompatible (apart from the one below :) ).
>
> WDYT?
>
> In addition I would like to "port back" the changes I made to
> the environment handling in 2.2 to 2.1.x as they improve the
> performance and clean up some hacks (not all :( ) we have in
> the code. And this would also make Leo's wish regarding
> the CocoonComponentManager easier. Unfortunately these changes
> are not 100% compatible: the o.a.c.Processor and the o.a.c.e.Environment
> interfaces have to change for this. But this shouldn't effect
> users, so it should be ok to change it.
> Is this ok?
>
> As a last note, my rewritten tree processor is growing (it's not
> feature complete yet), but I think it is very soon able to process
> all features of the sitemap and adding such things like virtual
> components shouldn't be that hard (hopefully).
big +1!
--
Stefano.
Re: Continue Development of 2.1.x
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>.
Le 17 avr. 04, à 20:06, Carsten Ziegeler a écrit :
> ...So, I would suggest that we change our development plan a little
> bit and consider adding those features to our 2.1.x code base
> that are independent from blocks, like e.g. the virtual sitemap
> components etc. Of course we should take care that the
> changes are not incompatible (apart from the one below :) )....
+1 from here as well.
IMO many people have no urgent need for a new container or Real Blocks,
so I agree that it makes a lot of sense to concentrate on 2.1 as the
"workhorse" version and not neglect it while working on the 2.2 (or
whatever version number) "experimental" stuff.
> ...In addition I would like to "port back" the changes I made to
> the environment handling in 2.2 to 2.1.x as they improve the
> performance and clean up some hacks (not all :( ) we have in
> the code. And this would also make Leo's wish regarding
> the CocoonComponentManager easier. Unfortunately these changes
> are not 100% compatible: the o.a.c.Processor and the
> o.a.c.e.Environment
> interfaces have to change for this. But this shouldn't effect
> users, so it should be ok to change it.
> Is this ok?
+1
-Bertrand
Re: Continue Development of 2.1.x
Posted by Gianugo Rabellino <gi...@apache.org>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> The development of blocks for 2.2 has started, but as others have
> already pointed out, it might take time to get it implemented
> and running well.
>
> So, I would suggest that we change our development plan a little
> bit and consider adding those features to our 2.1.x code base
> that are independent from blocks, like e.g. the virtual sitemap
> components etc. Of course we should take care that the
> changes are not incompatible (apart from the one below :) ).
+1. Please consider also sitemap logging as discussed in previous
threads (<map:log>): I really feel a need for that, especially now,
given the sometimes hard to debug roundtrips between sitemap and flow...
Ciao,
--
Gianugo Rabellino
Pro-netics s.r.l. - http://www.pro-netics.com
Orixo, the XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
(Blogging at: http://www.rabellino.it/blog/)
Re: Continue Development of 2.1.x
Posted by Andrew Savory <an...@luminas.co.uk>.
Hi,
On 19 Apr 2004, at 09:08, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> I have counted +1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard, Ralph and
> Gianugo (and myself of course :) )
> And we have the concerns from Ugo and Joerg? What do you two
> think, now after I could convince Ralph :) ?
belated +1
Andrew.
--
Andrew Savory, Managing Director, Luminas Limited
Tel: +44 (0)870 741 6658 Fax: +44 (0)700 598 1135
Web: http://www.luminas.co.uk/
Orixo alliance: http://www.orixo.com/
Re: Continue Development of 2.1.x
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 19.04.2004 10:08, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> And we have the concerns from Ugo and Joerg? What do you two
> think, now after I could convince Ralph :) ?
And it's really difficult to convince Ralph if the issue is backwards
compatibility related AFAIK :)
So I vote +1 for further development in 2.1 if it's only concerned to
"private" interfaces. If "public" interfaces are related I suggest to
switch to Cocoon 2.2 for this stuff, which is then a cleaner 2.1 and is
nearly fully compatible. For the new container/blocks stuff I would like
to see a Cocoon 3.0.
Joerg
Re: Continue Development of 2.1.x
Posted by Jeremy Quinn <je...@media.demon.co.uk>.
On 19 Apr 2004, at 11:52, Ugo Cei wrote:
> Il giorno 19/apr/04, alle 10:08, Carsten Ziegeler ha scritto:
>
>> I have counted +1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard, Ralph and
>> Gianugo (and myself of course :) )
>> And we have the concerns from Ugo and Joerg? What do you two
>> think, now after I could convince Ralph :) ?
>
> I think that, in practice, having three repositories (2.1, 2.2 and
> 3.0) might be too much of a hassle for the benefits it might bring.
> So, +1 from me too.
>
Hear Hear!!
my +1 too
Sorry for the delay, Carsten.
regards Jeremy
Re: Continue Development of 2.1.x
Posted by Ugo Cei <ug...@apache.org>.
Il giorno 19/apr/04, alle 10:08, Carsten Ziegeler ha scritto:
> I have counted +1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard, Ralph and
> Gianugo (and myself of course :) )
> And we have the concerns from Ugo and Joerg? What do you two
> think, now after I could convince Ralph :) ?
I think that, in practice, having three repositories (2.1, 2.2 and 3.0)
might be too much of a hassle for the benefits it might bring. So, +1
from me too.
Ugo
Re: Continue Development of 2.1.x
Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@reverycodes.com>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>Ok,
>
>I have counted +1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard, Ralph and
>Gianugo (and myself of course :) )
>
>
+1
I'm behind on my mail a bit...
Vadim
RE: Continue Development of 2.1.x
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Ok,
I have counted +1 from Stefano, Antonio, Reinhard, Ralph and
Gianugo (and myself of course :) )
And we have the concerns from Ugo and Joerg? What do you two
think, now after I could convince Ralph :) ?
Carsten
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carsten Ziegeler [mailto:cziegeler@s-und-n.de]
> Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 8:06 PM
> To: Cocoon-Dev
> Subject: Continue Development of 2.1.x
>
> The development of blocks for 2.2 has started, but as others
> have already pointed out, it might take time to get it
> implemented and running well.
>
> So, I would suggest that we change our development plan a
> little bit and consider adding those features to our 2.1.x
> code base that are independent from blocks, like e.g. the
> virtual sitemap components etc. Of course we should take care
> that the changes are not incompatible (apart from the one below :) ).
>
> WDYT?
>
> In addition I would like to "port back" the changes I made to
> the environment handling in 2.2 to 2.1.x as they improve the
> performance and clean up some hacks (not all :( ) we have in
> the code. And this would also make Leo's wish regarding the
> CocoonComponentManager easier. Unfortunately these changes
> are not 100% compatible: the o.a.c.Processor and the
> o.a.c.e.Environment interfaces have to change for this. But
> this shouldn't effect users, so it should be ok to change it.
> Is this ok?
>
> As a last note, my rewritten tree processor is growing (it's
> not feature complete yet), but I think it is very soon able
> to process all features of the sitemap and adding such things
> like virtual components shouldn't be that hard (hopefully).
>
> Carsten
>
> Carsten Ziegeler
> Open Source Group, S&N AG
> http://www.osoco.net/weblogs/rael/
>
>