Re: [Plan] The future of Cocoon

[go...@osmosis.gr]

On Wed, 26 May 2004, Pier Fumagalli wrote:

> On 26 May 2004, at 10:17, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> >
> > Some things that come to my mind for 2.2:
> > - first finished version of CForms.
> > - deprecate XSP (and provide a viable alternative)
many people talking about "deprecate XSP" but can i ask something?

is any better alternative to produce xml quering databases?

i think that until now the way ESQL-->XML--> any tranfrormation --> .. 
has no better alternative 


--stavros 


> > - cleaning up the caching/store mess
> > - remove deprecated blocks etc.
> 
> I like it, I like it! :-) (yep, twice).
> 
> Starting on 2.2 to bring the current 2.1 to a level of complete 
> solidity of contracts and features is, IMVHO, an optimal idea, and puts 
> us in the position (also) to start using the Linux-like versioning 
> scheme.
> 
> 2.2 will be our "stable" tree, and all crummy development (real blocks, 
> and you name it) can easily happen in 2.3 which will always be kept as 
> "unstable", to end up with a 2.4 release! :-P
> 
> Now, the only thing I'm horrified about is that voice about a BRANCH in 
> our current CVS (aaarrrrggggghhhh)... I'd say we clear out the 2.2 CVS 
> repo and do a clean re-import of 2.1.5, or switch to Subversion now, 
> but purlllease don't add any branch in the tree...
> 
> If someone wants, I can rename the 2.2 repository into a 2.3 straight 
> away (so that we ain't going to lose anything)...
> 
> 	Pier
> 
> 

Re: [Plan] The future of Cocoon

[Upayavira <uv...@upaya.co.uk>]

gounis@osmosis.gr wrote:

>On Wed, 26 May 2004, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
>  
>
>>On 26 May 2004, at 10:17, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Some things that come to my mind for 2.2:
>>>- first finished version of CForms.
>>>- deprecate XSP (and provide a viable alternative)
>>>      
>>>
>many people talking about "deprecate XSP" but can i ask something?
>
>is any better alternative to produce xml quering databases?
>
>i think that until now the way ESQL-->XML--> any tranfrormation --> .. 
>has no better alternative 
>  
>
No there isn't. And until there is, XSP can't be deprecated. Hence 
Carsten saying, "and provide a viable alternative".

Upayavira

>>>- cleaning up the caching/store mess
>>>- remove deprecated blocks etc.
>>>      
>>>
>>I like it, I like it! :-) (yep, twice).
>>
>>Starting on 2.2 to bring the current 2.1 to a level of complete 
>>solidity of contracts and features is, IMVHO, an optimal idea, and puts 
>>us in the position (also) to start using the Linux-like versioning 
>>scheme.
>>
>>2.2 will be our "stable" tree, and all crummy development (real blocks, 
>>and you name it) can easily happen in 2.3 which will always be kept as 
>>"unstable", to end up with a 2.4 release! :-P
>>
>>Now, the only thing I'm horrified about is that voice about a BRANCH in 
>>our current CVS (aaarrrrggggghhhh)... I'd say we clear out the 2.2 CVS 
>>repo and do a clean re-import of 2.1.5, or switch to Subversion now, 
>>but purlllease don't add any branch in the tree...
>>
>>If someone wants, I can rename the 2.2 repository into a 2.3 straight 
>>away (so that we ain't going to lose anything)...
>>
>>	Pier
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>