You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org> on 2004/03/09 16:05:58 UTC
form framework clean up
Since we are currently in the middle of cleaning
up and focussing on *the* one form framework I
like to propose and get rid of precept.
*snief*
I guess it's more or less dead code now and
it's an unecessary choice we should get rid of
IMO. I doubt anyone is using it so we won't
need a grace period.
So here is my +1 on removing precept
--
Torsten
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 09.03.2004 16:05, Torsten Curdt wrote:
> Since we are currently in the middle of cleaning
> up and focussing on *the* one form framework I
> like to propose and get rid of precept.
>
> *snief*
>
> I guess it's more or less dead code now and
> it's an unecessary choice we should get rid of
> IMO. I doubt anyone is using it so we won't
> need a grace period.
>
> So here is my +1 on removing precept
+1
Joerg
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Guido Casper <gc...@s-und-n.de>.
Torsten Curdt wrote:
> Since we are currently in the middle of cleaning
> up and focussing on *the* one form framework I
> like to propose and get rid of precept.
>
> *snief*
>
> I guess it's more or less dead code now and
> it's an unecessary choice we should get rid of
> IMO. I doubt anyone is using it so we won't
> need a grace period.
>
> So here is my +1 on removing precept
I remember there were some interesting concepts while listening to your
discussions with Ivelin. But I think it's the right move.
+1
Guido
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Reinhard Pötz <re...@apache.org>.
Torsten Curdt wrote:
> Since we are currently in the middle of cleaning
> up and focussing on *the* one form framework I
> like to propose and get rid of precept.
>
> *snief*
>
> I guess it's more or less dead code now and
> it's an unecessary choice we should get rid of
> IMO. I doubt anyone is using it so we won't
> need a grace period.
>
> So here is my +1 on removing precept
+1
--
Reinhard
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Torsten Curdt wrote:
> Since we are currently in the middle of cleaning
> up and focussing on *the* one form framework I
> like to propose and get rid of precept.
>
> *snief*
>
> I guess it's more or less dead code now and
> it's an unecessary choice we should get rid of
> IMO. I doubt anyone is using it so we won't
> need a grace period.
>
> So here is my +1 on removing precept
+1
--
Stefano.
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>.
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> Reinhard Pötz <reinhard <at> apache.org> writes:
>
>
>>>>Please don't forget to mention it our step in the documents.
>>>
>>>You mean adding a "removed since 2.1.5" to the wiki docu?
>>
>>And IIRC there is official documentation available too. I think of a
>>warning box at the top.
>
>
> I would prefer a real clean up including the documentation. We have the changes
> (status.xml) for mentioning the removal. BTW, this would be a good use case for
> @importance/@impact in status.xml. Was there any action on this after the
> discussion about it?
I'd also be in favor of the "clean" way
...since noone complained after I announced
the removal on the users list - this might
be ok as well.
At least for 2.1.5-dev
so blast or annotate the docs?
--
Torsten
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
Reinhard Pötz <reinhard <at> apache.org> writes:
> >> Please don't forget to mention it our step in the documents.
> >
> > You mean adding a "removed since 2.1.5" to the wiki docu?
>
> And IIRC there is official documentation available too. I think of a
> warning box at the top.
I would prefer a real clean up including the documentation. We have the changes
(status.xml) for mentioning the removal. BTW, this would be a good use case for
@importance/@impact in status.xml. Was there any action on this after the
discussion about it?
Joerg
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Reinhard Pötz <re...@apache.org>.
Torsten Curdt wrote:
>>>>>> I asked over a cocoon-user. Up til now 100% of them are saying
>>>>>> remove it *now*. (about 17 users responded) It was clearly stated
>>>>>> the vast amount of options lead more to confusion than they are
>>>>>> helpful. ...as we already know :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If noone objects I'll remove both blocks either tonight or tomorrow.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I would say, just wait some more days. We have to remove the blocks
>>>>> before the next release. So it actually doesn't matter if we
>>>>> remove it today or next week. But waiting just some more days
>>>>> might give users that are reading the list only from time to time
>>>>> to answer as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apart from that: blast it!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> alright
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> a few day later - no further answers
>>> ...so we are still at 100%
>>>
>>> If noone objects... (see above ;)
>>> --
>>> Torsten
>>>
>>>
>> Please don't forget to mention it our step in the documents.
>
>
> You mean adding a "removed since 2.1.5" to the wiki docu?
And IIRC there is official documentation available too. I think of a
warning box at the top.
--
Reinhard
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>.
>>>>> I asked over a cocoon-user. Up til now 100% of them are saying
>>>>> remove it *now*. (about 17 users responded) It was clearly stated
>>>>> the vast amount of options lead more to confusion than they are
>>>>> helpful. ...as we already know :)
>>>>>
>>>>> If noone objects I'll remove both blocks either tonight or tomorrow.
>>>>>
>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would say, just wait some more days. We have to remove the blocks
>>>> before the next release. So it actually doesn't matter if we
>>>> remove it today or next week. But waiting just some more days
>>>> might give users that are reading the list only from time to time
>>>> to answer as well.
>>>>
>>>> Apart from that: blast it!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> alright
>>
>>
>>
>> a few day later - no further answers
>> ...so we are still at 100%
>>
>> If noone objects... (see above ;)
>> --
>> Torsten
>>
>>
> Please don't forget to mention it our step in the documents.
You mean adding a "removed since 2.1.5" to the wiki docu?
--
Torsten
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Reinhard Pötz <re...@apache.org>.
Torsten Curdt wrote:
>>>> I asked over a cocoon-user. Up til now 100% of them are saying
>>>> remove it *now*. (about 17 users responded) It was clearly stated
>>>> the vast amount of options lead more to confusion than they are
>>>> helpful. ...as we already know :)
>>>>
>>>> If noone objects I'll remove both blocks either tonight or tomorrow.
>>>>
>>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I would say, just wait some more days. We have to remove the blocks
>>> before the next release. So it actually doesn't matter if we
>>> remove it today or next week. But waiting just some more days
>>> might give users that are reading the list only from time to time
>>> to answer as well.
>>>
>>> Apart from that: blast it!
>>
>>
>>
>> alright
>
>
> a few day later - no further answers
> ...so we are still at 100%
>
> If noone objects... (see above ;)
> --
> Torsten
>
>
Please don't forget to mention it our step in the documents.
--
Reinhard
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>.
>>> I asked over a cocoon-user. Up til now 100% of them are saying remove
>>> it *now*. (about 17 users responded) It was clearly stated the vast
>>> amount of options lead more to confusion than they are helpful. ...as
>>> we already know :)
>>>
>>> If noone objects I'll remove both blocks either tonight or tomorrow.
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>
>>
>>
>> I would say, just wait some more days. We have to remove the blocks
>> before the next release. So it actually doesn't matter if we
>> remove it today or next week. But waiting just some more days
>> might give users that are reading the list only from time to time
>> to answer as well.
>>
>> Apart from that: blast it!
>
>
> alright
a few day later - no further answers
...so we are still at 100%
If noone objects... (see above ;)
--
Torsten
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>.
>>I asked over a cocoon-user. Up til now 100% of them are
>>saying remove it *now*. (about 17 users responded) It was
>>clearly stated the vast amount of options lead more to
>>confusion than they are helpful. ...as we already know :)
>>
>>If noone objects I'll remove both blocks either tonight or tomorrow.
>>
>>WDYT?
>
>
> I would say, just wait some more days. We have to remove the blocks
> before the next release. So it actually doesn't matter if we
> remove it today or next week. But waiting just some more days
> might give users that are reading the list only from time to time
> to answer as well.
>
> Apart from that: blast it!
alright
--
Torsten
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Reinhard Pötz <re...@apache.org>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>Torsten Curdt wrote:
>
>
>>I asked over a cocoon-user. Up til now 100% of them are
>>saying remove it *now*. (about 17 users responded) It was
>>clearly stated the vast amount of options lead more to
>>confusion than they are helpful. ...as we already know :)
>>
>>If noone objects I'll remove both blocks either tonight or tomorrow.
>>
>>WDYT?
>>
>>
>
>I would say, just wait some more days. We have to remove the blocks
>before the next release. So it actually doesn't matter if we
>remove it today or next week. But waiting just some more days
>might give users that are reading the list only from time to time
>to answer as well.
>
>Apart from that: blast it!
>
>
+1 (wait for next week so that everybody has a chance to comment)
--
Reinhard
RE: form framework clean up
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Torsten Curdt wrote:
>
> I asked over a cocoon-user. Up til now 100% of them are
> saying remove it *now*. (about 17 users responded) It was
> clearly stated the vast amount of options lead more to
> confusion than they are helpful. ...as we already know :)
>
> If noone objects I'll remove both blocks either tonight or tomorrow.
>
> WDYT?
I would say, just wait some more days. We have to remove the blocks
before the next release. So it actually doesn't matter if we
remove it today or next week. But waiting just some more days
might give users that are reading the list only from time to time
to answer as well.
Apart from that: blast it!
Carsten
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 12.03.2004 11:19, Torsten Curdt wrote:
> I asked over a cocoon-user.
Thanks for that.
> Up til now 100% of
> them are saying remove it *now*. (about 17
> users responded) It was clearly stated the
> vast amount of options lead more to confusion
> than they are helpful. ...as we already know :)
I did not expect such a clear result.
> If noone objects I'll remove both blocks
> either tonight or tomorrow.
Me not.
Joerg
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>.
>>>> xmlform has already been deprecated for quite a while now. I think
>>>> it is safe to remove it.
>>>
>>>
>>> It's only half a year:
>>> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=107662678916017&w=4.
>>>
>>> I would deprecate jxforms block now and remove both for 2.2 (which is
>>> infact just a non-update to real blocks).
>>
>>
>> ...really keep it in 2.1?
>
>
> I thought I'm the one who wants to remove stuff to early :)
>
> I don't need those both blocks, so I'm not blocking this for myself's
> needs. Maybe we should ask the users?
I asked over a cocoon-user. Up til now 100% of
them are saying remove it *now*. (about 17
users responded) It was clearly stated the
vast amount of options lead more to confusion
than they are helpful. ...as we already know :)
If noone objects I'll remove both blocks
either tonight or tomorrow.
WDYT?
--
Torsten
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 10.03.2004 13:35, Torsten Curdt wrote:
>>> xmlform has already been deprecated for quite a while now. I think it
>>> is safe to remove it.
>>
>> It's only half a year:
>> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=107662678916017&w=4.
>>
>> I would deprecate jxforms block now and remove both for 2.2 (which is
>> infact just a non-update to real blocks).
>
> ...really keep it in 2.1?
I thought I'm the one who wants to remove stuff to early :)
I don't need those both blocks, so I'm not blocking this for myself's
needs. Maybe we should ask the users?
Joerg
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>.
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> On 10.03.2004 12:46, Unico Hommes wrote:
>
>>>> BTW, what about xmlform and jxforms. Are they still necessary?!
>>>> Perhaps its time for some clean up.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sounds like a good idea. But I guess we have to deprecate
>>> them first like we do with the former-woody block now.
>>>
>> xmlform has already been deprecated for quite a while now. I think it
>> is safe to remove it.
>
>
> It's only half a year:
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=107662678916017&w=4.
>
> I would deprecate jxforms block now and remove both for 2.2 (which is
> infact just a non-update to real blocks).
...really keep it in 2.1?
--
Torsten
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 10.03.2004 12:46, Unico Hommes wrote:
>>> BTW, what about xmlform and jxforms. Are they still necessary?!
>>> Perhaps its time for some clean up.
>>
>> Sounds like a good idea. But I guess we have to deprecate
>> them first like we do with the former-woody block now.
>>
> xmlform has already been deprecated for quite a while now. I think it is
> safe to remove it.
It's only half a year:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=107662678916017&w=4.
I would deprecate jxforms block now and remove both for 2.2 (which is
infact just a non-update to real blocks).
Joerg
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Unico Hommes <un...@hippo.nl>.
Torsten Curdt wrote:
> Stephan Michels wrote:
>
>> Am Di, den 09.03.2004 schrieb Sylvain Wallez um 16:27:
>>
>>> Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Le Mardi, 9 mars 2004, à 16:05 Europe/Zurich, Torsten Curdt a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Since we are currently in the middle of cleaning
>>>>> up and focussing on *the* one form framework I
>>>>> like to propose and get rid of precept....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1, with thanks for your work on it!
>>>
>>>
>>> Ditto. I remember your presentations on forms at the first GT. So
>>> many options we had at that time ;-)
>>
>>
>>
>> BTW, what about xmlform and jxforms. Are they still necessary?!
>> Perhaps its time for some clean up.
>
>
> Sounds like a good idea. But I guess we have to deprecate
> them first like we do with the former-woody block now.
>
xmlform has already been deprecated for quite a while now. I think it is
safe to remove it.
--
Unico
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>.
Stephan Michels wrote:
> Am Di, den 09.03.2004 schrieb Sylvain Wallez um 16:27:
>
>>Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Le Mardi, 9 mars 2004, à 16:05 Europe/Zurich, Torsten Curdt a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>>Since we are currently in the middle of cleaning
>>>>up and focussing on *the* one form framework I
>>>>like to propose and get rid of precept....
>>>
>>>
>>>+1, with thanks for your work on it!
>>
>>Ditto. I remember your presentations on forms at the first GT. So many
>>options we had at that time ;-)
>
>
> BTW, what about xmlform and jxforms. Are they still necessary?!
> Perhaps its time for some clean up.
Sounds like a good idea. But I guess we have to deprecate
them first like we do with the former-woody block now.
--
Torsten
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Stephan Michels <st...@apache.org>.
Am Di, den 09.03.2004 schrieb Sylvain Wallez um 16:27:
> Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
> > Le Mardi, 9 mars 2004, à 16:05 Europe/Zurich, Torsten Curdt a écrit :
> >
> >> Since we are currently in the middle of cleaning
> >> up and focussing on *the* one form framework I
> >> like to propose and get rid of precept....
> >
> >
> > +1, with thanks for your work on it!
>
> Ditto. I remember your presentations on forms at the first GT. So many
> options we had at that time ;-)
BTW, what about xmlform and jxforms. Are they still necessary?!
Perhaps its time for some clean up.
Stephan.
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>.
>> I am glad we finally have something
>> which is supported by the community!
>>
>> Thanks, guys
>
>
> We thank *you*, Torsen.
>
> It's great to have code contributed, but the hardest thing for a
> developer is to remove his/her own contribution in such a simple and
> painless way.
>
> This is the greatest achievement that a programmer can reach, IMO.
>
> And it feels so good to see thing happening, especially when our avalon
> cousins have burned their entire thing to the ground and everybody left
> to fork their own framework (if you want someone to blame, look at the
> ones remaining)
>
> I said this a long time ago: you are never far enough from your ego to
> be safe, but being able to remove your contribution makes me say:
>
> chapeau
>
> it's a pleasure and an honor to be part of this group.
It's the community - not the code that counts.
So it's just a straight forward conclusion.
...and no big deal :) at least for me
Thanks for the kind words though
--
Torsten
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Torsten Curdt wrote:
>>>> Since we are currently in the middle of cleaning
>>>> up and focussing on *the* one form framework I
>>>> like to propose and get rid of precept....
>
>
> Done
>
>>> +1, with thanks for your work on it!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Ditto. I remember your presentations on forms at the first GT. So many
>> options we had at that time ;-)
>
>
> I am glad we finally have something
> which is supported by the community!
>
> Thanks, guys
We thank *you*, Torsen.
It's great to have code contributed, but the hardest thing for a
developer is to remove his/her own contribution in such a simple and
painless way.
This is the greatest achievement that a programmer can reach, IMO.
And it feels so good to see thing happening, especially when our avalon
cousins have burned their entire thing to the ground and everybody left
to fork their own framework (if you want someone to blame, look at the
ones remaining)
I said this a long time ago: you are never far enough from your ego to
be safe, but being able to remove your contribution makes me say:
chapeau
it's a pleasure and an honor to be part of this group.
--
Stefano.
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>.
>>> Since we are currently in the middle of cleaning
>>> up and focussing on *the* one form framework I
>>> like to propose and get rid of precept....
Done
>> +1, with thanks for your work on it!
>
>
>
> Ditto. I remember your presentations on forms at the first GT. So many
> options we had at that time ;-)
I am glad we finally have something
which is supported by the community!
Thanks, guys
--
Torsten
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>.
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Le Mardi, 9 mars 2004, à 16:05 Europe/Zurich, Torsten Curdt a écrit :
>
>> Since we are currently in the middle of cleaning
>> up and focussing on *the* one form framework I
>> like to propose and get rid of precept....
>
>
> +1, with thanks for your work on it!
Ditto. I remember your presentations on forms at the first GT. So many
options we had at that time ;-)
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Re: form framework clean up
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Le Mardi, 9 mars 2004, à 16:05 Europe/Zurich, Torsten Curdt a écrit :
> Since we are currently in the middle of cleaning
> up and focussing on *the* one form framework I
> like to propose and get rid of precept....
+1, with thanks for your work on it!
-Bertrand