You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org> on 2004/02/05 11:24:38 UTC
Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Howdie,
when establishing the Cocoon TLP with the ASF board, we received the
comment that the then-submitted mission statement of the Cocoon TLP was
self-referencing or recursive, i.e. the Cocoon TLP had as a goal the
prosperity of the Cocoon project, with "Cocoon" not being properly
defined as a tangible goal on its own. So if the Cocoon community would
decide now to start developing a J2EE container (godforbid), we would
be allowed to by our mission statement.
I'd like to submit a better mission statement for the upcoming board
meeting, keeping in mind future subprojects like Lenya and Forrest (or
blocks being spun off as subprojects such as the portal). Looking at
what differentiates us from other technologies and frameworks, I feel
we should include notions as:
- Java-based (or do we want our mission statement to be
technology-neutral?)
- XML/SAX-based pipelines
- the sitemap as a centralized request handling configuration mechanism
through decoupling of URI space with request response construction
- different runtime environments (Servlet/CLI/Portlet)
- technical frameworks such as continuation-based flow control, form
handling, templating transformers
- functional frameworks such as the portal, linotype
- applications based on top of all this such as Lenya & Forrest
I'll try to wordsmith this into a short mission statement, but I'd like
to hear whether this categorization makes sense to you.
Cheers,
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source Java & XML An Orixo Member
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Juan Jose Pablos <ch...@che-che.com>.
Steven Noels wrote:
> On 05 Feb 2004, at 11:24, Steven Noels wrote:
>
>> I'll try to wordsmith this into a short mission statement, but I'd
>> like to hear whether this categorization makes sense to you.
>
>
> Thanks for all your comments & suggestions. Let's see how lyric I am today:
>
<skip nice retoric>
> How's that sound? Your votes please.
>
> </Steven>
nice :-) +1
Cheche
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Upayavira <uv...@upaya.co.uk>.
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Upayavira wrote:
>
>> Steven Noels wrote:
>>
>>> On 05 Feb 2004, at 11:24, Steven Noels wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'll try to wordsmith this into a short mission statement, but I'd
>>>> like to hear whether this categorization makes sense to you.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for all your comments & suggestions. Let's see how lyric I am
>>> today:
>>>
>>> "The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
>>> exploration, design and implementation of web application frameworks
>>> with a focus on XML pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms
>>> and separation of concerns through composability rather than
>>> programmability, by combining and adding onto existing Apache and
>>> other open source libraries. It hosts web application development
>>> frameworks, applications built on these frameworks, and development
>>> tools built for these frameworks and applications."
>>
>>
>>
>> Sounds good. Concern though is that it reads 'web-centric'. Whilst
>> Cocoon is 'primarily' about web publishing and applications, it is
>> not 'exclusively' about that. Get that in there somewhere, and I'll
>> be happy!
>
>
>
> It all depends on what we understand by "web". Considering the CLI
> (your pet Cocoon environment), the final target is web publishing,
> isn't it?
I wasn't really thinking of the CLI, because, as you say, it is 'web'
still. But there's the JMS stuff in CVS already, there 'could' be a
maillet environment at some point, and I don't want to see our goals
blocking those. Some small caveat is all that is needed.
> Now that's true that I also use the CocoonBean in a Swing application
> that has no relation to the web. But this seems very marginal to me.
Yup, but other environments _could_ come along that aren't so marginal.
And, IMO, our 'mission statement' needs to include all areas where we
'could reasonably' go, e.g. development tools (of which we have very few
at the mo).
Regards, Upayavira
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>.
Upayavira wrote:
> Steven Noels wrote:
>
>> On 05 Feb 2004, at 11:24, Steven Noels wrote:
>>
>>> I'll try to wordsmith this into a short mission statement, but I'd
>>> like to hear whether this categorization makes sense to you.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for all your comments & suggestions. Let's see how lyric I am
>> today:
>>
>> "The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
>> exploration, design and implementation of web application frameworks
>> with a focus on XML pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms
>> and separation of concerns through composability rather than
>> programmability, by combining and adding onto existing Apache and
>> other open source libraries. It hosts web application development
>> frameworks, applications built on these frameworks, and development
>> tools built for these frameworks and applications."
>
>
> Sounds good. Concern though is that it reads 'web-centric'. Whilst
> Cocoon is 'primarily' about web publishing and applications, it is not
> 'exclusively' about that. Get that in there somewhere, and I'll be happy!
It all depends on what we understand by "web". Considering the CLI (your
pet Cocoon environment), the final target is web publishing, isn't it?
Now that's true that I also use the CocoonBean in a Swing application
that has no relation to the web. But this seems very marginal to me.
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Tim Larson <ti...@keow.org>.
On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 08:11:26PM +0100, Torsten Curdt wrote:
> >>"The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
> >>exploration, design and implementation of application frameworks,
> >>specifically but not exclusively web related. It focuses on XML
> >>pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms and separation of
> >>concerns through composability rather than programmability, by
> >>combining and extending existing Apache and other open source
> >>libraries. It hosts application development frameworks, applications
> >>built on these frameworks, and development tools built for these
> >>frameworks and applications."
> >>
> >>How's that?
> >
> >
> >+1 from me.
>
> here is my +1
> --
> Torsten
+1
--Tim Larson
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>.
>> "The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
>> exploration, design and implementation of application frameworks,
>> specifically but not exclusively web related. It focuses on XML
>> pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms and separation of
>> concerns through composability rather than programmability, by
>> combining and extending existing Apache and other open source
>> libraries. It hosts application development frameworks, applications
>> built on these frameworks, and development tools built for these
>> frameworks and applications."
>>
>> How's that?
>
>
> +1 from me.
here is my +1
--
Torsten
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Geoff Howard <co...@leverageweb.com>.
Upayavira wrote:
> Geoff Howard wrote:
>
>> Upayavira wrote:
>>
>>> Steven Noels wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 05 Feb 2004, at 11:24, Steven Noels wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'll try to wordsmith this into a short mission statement, but I'd
>>>>> like to hear whether this categorization makes sense to you.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for all your comments & suggestions. Let's see how lyric I am
>>>> today:
>>>>
>>>> "The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
>>>> exploration, design and implementation of web application frameworks
>>>> with a focus on XML pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms
>>>> and separation of concerns through composability rather than
>>>> programmability, by combining and adding onto existing Apache and
>>>> other open source libraries. It hosts web application development
>>>> frameworks, applications built on these frameworks, and development
>>>> tools built for these frameworks and applications."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sounds good. Concern though is that it reads 'web-centric'. Whilst
>>> Cocoon is 'primarily' about web publishing and applications, it is
>>> not 'exclusively' about that. Get that in there somewhere, and I'll
>>> be happy!
>>
>>
>>
>> would just dropping "web" from "web application frameworks" work?
>
>
> Okay, I'll bite:
>
> "The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
> exploration, design and implementation of application frameworks,
> specifically but not exclusively web related. It focuses on XML
> pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms and separation of
> concerns through composability rather than programmability, by combining
> and extending existing Apache and other open source libraries. It hosts
> application development frameworks, applications built on these
> frameworks, and development tools built for these frameworks and
> applications."
>
> How's that?
+1 from me.
Geoff
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 10.02.2004 14:40, Upayavira wrote:
> Okay, I'll bite:
>
> "The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
> exploration, design and implementation of application frameworks,
> specifically but not exclusively web related. It focuses on XML
> pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms and separation of
> concerns through composability rather than programmability, by combining
> and extending existing Apache and other open source libraries. It hosts
> application development frameworks, applications built on these
> frameworks, and development tools built for these frameworks and
> applications."
>
> How's that?
+1
Joerg
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Andrew Savory <an...@luminas.co.uk>.
On 10 Feb 2004, at 13:40, Upayavira wrote:
> How's that?
+1 from me.
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: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@reverycodes.com>.
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Upayavira wrote:
>
>> Okay, I'll bite:
>>
>> "The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
>> exploration, design and implementation of application frameworks,
>> specifically but not exclusively web related. It focuses on XML
>> pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms and separation of
>> concerns through composability rather than programmability, by
>> combining and extending existing Apache and other open source
>> libraries. It hosts application development frameworks, applications
>> built on these frameworks, and development tools built for these
>> frameworks and applications."
>>
>> How's that?
>
+1
Vadim
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Upayavira wrote:
> Geoff Howard wrote:
>
>> Upayavira wrote:
>>
>>> Steven Noels wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 05 Feb 2004, at 11:24, Steven Noels wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'll try to wordsmith this into a short mission statement, but I'd
>>>>> like to hear whether this categorization makes sense to you.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for all your comments & suggestions. Let's see how lyric I am
>>>> today:
>>>>
>>>> "The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
>>>> exploration, design and implementation of web application frameworks
>>>> with a focus on XML pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms
>>>> and separation of concerns through composability rather than
>>>> programmability, by combining and adding onto existing Apache and
>>>> other open source libraries. It hosts web application development
>>>> frameworks, applications built on these frameworks, and development
>>>> tools built for these frameworks and applications."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sounds good. Concern though is that it reads 'web-centric'. Whilst
>>> Cocoon is 'primarily' about web publishing and applications, it is
>>> not 'exclusively' about that. Get that in there somewhere, and I'll
>>> be happy!
>>
>>
>>
>> would just dropping "web" from "web application frameworks" work?
>
>
> Okay, I'll bite:
>
> "The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
> exploration, design and implementation of application frameworks,
> specifically but not exclusively web related. It focuses on XML
> pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms and separation of
> concerns through composability rather than programmability, by combining
> and extending existing Apache and other open source libraries. It hosts
> application development frameworks, applications built on these
> frameworks, and development tools built for these frameworks and
> applications."
>
> How's that?
Sounds good to me.
You might want to run this thru the board first, though, since I'm not
that sure they would buy everything we might throw at them.
--
Stefano.
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Upayavira <uv...@upaya.co.uk>.
Geoff Howard wrote:
> Upayavira wrote:
>
>> Steven Noels wrote:
>>
>>> On 05 Feb 2004, at 11:24, Steven Noels wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'll try to wordsmith this into a short mission statement, but I'd
>>>> like to hear whether this categorization makes sense to you.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for all your comments & suggestions. Let's see how lyric I am
>>> today:
>>>
>>> "The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
>>> exploration, design and implementation of web application frameworks
>>> with a focus on XML pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms
>>> and separation of concerns through composability rather than
>>> programmability, by combining and adding onto existing Apache and
>>> other open source libraries. It hosts web application development
>>> frameworks, applications built on these frameworks, and development
>>> tools built for these frameworks and applications."
>>
>>
>>
>> Sounds good. Concern though is that it reads 'web-centric'. Whilst
>> Cocoon is 'primarily' about web publishing and applications, it is
>> not 'exclusively' about that. Get that in there somewhere, and I'll
>> be happy!
>
>
> would just dropping "web" from "web application frameworks" work?
Okay, I'll bite:
"The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
exploration, design and implementation of application frameworks,
specifically but not exclusively web related. It focuses on XML
pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms and separation of
concerns through composability rather than programmability, by combining
and extending existing Apache and other open source libraries. It hosts
application development frameworks, applications built on these
frameworks, and development tools built for these frameworks and
applications."
How's that?
Upayavira
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
On 10 Feb 2004, at 13:34, Geoff Howard wrote:
> would just dropping "web" from "web application frameworks" work?
I'd change "web" into "internet". Vague enough? ;-)
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source Java & XML An Orixo Member
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Geoff Howard <co...@leverageweb.com>.
Upayavira wrote:
> Steven Noels wrote:
>
>> On 05 Feb 2004, at 11:24, Steven Noels wrote:
>>
>>> I'll try to wordsmith this into a short mission statement, but I'd
>>> like to hear whether this categorization makes sense to you.
>>
>> Thanks for all your comments & suggestions. Let's see how lyric I am
>> today:
>>
>> "The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
>> exploration, design and implementation of web application frameworks
>> with a focus on XML pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms
>> and separation of concerns through composability rather than
>> programmability, by combining and adding onto existing Apache and
>> other open source libraries. It hosts web application development
>> frameworks, applications built on these frameworks, and development
>> tools built for these frameworks and applications."
>
>
> Sounds good. Concern though is that it reads 'web-centric'. Whilst
> Cocoon is 'primarily' about web publishing and applications, it is not
> 'exclusively' about that. Get that in there somewhere, and I'll be happy!
would just dropping "web" from "web application frameworks" work?
Geoff
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Upayavira <uv...@upaya.co.uk>.
Steven Noels wrote:
> On 05 Feb 2004, at 11:24, Steven Noels wrote:
>
>> I'll try to wordsmith this into a short mission statement, but I'd
>> like to hear whether this categorization makes sense to you.
>
>
> Thanks for all your comments & suggestions. Let's see how lyric I am
> today:
>
> "The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
> exploration, design and implementation of web application frameworks
> with a focus on XML pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms
> and separation of concerns through composability rather than
> programmability, by combining and adding onto existing Apache and
> other open source libraries. It hosts web application development
> frameworks, applications built on these frameworks, and development
> tools built for these frameworks and applications."
Sounds good. Concern though is that it reads 'web-centric'. Whilst
Cocoon is 'primarily' about web publishing and applications, it is not
'exclusively' about that. Get that in there somewhere, and I'll be happy!
Regards, Upayavira
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>.
Steven Noels wrote:
> On 05 Feb 2004, at 11:24, Steven Noels wrote:
>
>> I'll try to wordsmith this into a short mission statement, but I'd
>> like to hear whether this categorization makes sense to you.
>
>
> Thanks for all your comments & suggestions. Let's see how lyric I am
> today:
>
> "The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
> exploration, design and implementation of web application frameworks
> with a focus on XML pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms
> and separation of concerns through composability rather than
> programmability, by combining and adding onto existing Apache and
> other open source libraries. It hosts web application development
> frameworks, applications built on these frameworks, and development
> tools built for these frameworks and applications."
>
> How's that sound? Your votes please.
Looks good, even if a bit abstract. But that's the mission statement and
not the marketing material.
So +1!
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Le Mardi, 10 fév 2004, à 11:24 Europe/Zurich, Steven Noels a écrit :
> ...
> "The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
> exploration, design and implementation of web application frameworks
> with a focus on XML pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms
> and separation of concerns through composability rather than
> programmability, by combining and adding onto existing Apache and
> other open source libraries. It hosts web application development
> frameworks, applications built on these frameworks, and development
> tools built for these frameworks and applications."
Thanks Steven!
The first phrase is a bit long, maybe a fullstop somewhere would help
but no big deal.
-Bertrand
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
On 05 Feb 2004, at 11:24, Steven Noels wrote:
> I'll try to wordsmith this into a short mission statement, but I'd
> like to hear whether this categorization makes sense to you.
Thanks for all your comments & suggestions. Let's see how lyric I am
today:
"The Apache Cocoon Community Project fosters community-based
exploration, design and implementation of web application frameworks
with a focus on XML pipelining, centralized configuration mechanisms
and separation of concerns through composability rather than
programmability, by combining and adding onto existing Apache and other
open source libraries. It hosts web application development frameworks,
applications built on these frameworks, and development tools built for
these frameworks and applications."
How's that sound? Your votes please.
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source Java & XML An Orixo Member
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
On 5 Feb 2004, at 11:08, Nicolas Toper wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been following this thread and I've kept wondering: what is a
> TLP???
>
> :=)
Yeah, right. sorry :-)
TLP is a Top Level Project, basically anything that is like
*.apache.org.
cocoon became TLP when it moved from inside xml.apache.org (so under
the supervision of the Apache XML Project Management Committee [PMC])
to cocoon.apache.org (under the supervision of the Apache Cocoon PMC).
Steven is the chair of that committee and reports to the ASF board of
directors, which required us to clear up our PMC charter status.
--
Stefano.
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>.
Nicolas Toper wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I've been following this thread and I've kept wondering: what is a TLP???
>
>
"Top Level Project", i.e. "cocoon.apache.org" and not
"xml.apache.org/cocoon" as it used to be.
A TLP has a PMC ("Project Management Comittee") that decides the goals,
roadmap and orientations of the TLP, and ensure that all subprojects
(the Cocoon framework and the incubating Lenya as of now) live and
behave properly regarding both the TLP goals and the ASF ("Apache
Software Foundation").
Yeah, lots of 3-letters acronyms ;-)
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Geoff Howard <co...@leverageweb.com>.
Nicolas Toper wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been following this thread and I've kept wondering: what is a TLP???
>
> :=)
"Top Level Project". Cocoon was recently promoted within the Apache
organization from a sub-project of the XML TLP (http://xml.apache.org)
to its own TLP (http://cocoon.apache.org).
At present there are only two children projects of this TLP: Cocoon, and
Lenya as you can see under the Projects section on the root page at the
site.
Geoff
RE: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Reinhard Poetz <re...@apache.org>.
top level project
See the left menu at http://www.apache.org/ for all Apache TLP
--
Reinhard
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nicolas Toper [mailto:ntoper@jouve.fr]
> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 5:08 PM
> To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I've been following this thread and I've kept wondering: what
> is a TLP???
>
> :=)
>
> nicolas
>
> Le Jeudi 05 Février 2004 16:17, Geoff Howard a écrit :
> > Tim Larson wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 08:48:29AM -0500, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> > >>On 5 Feb 2004, at 06:46, Geoff Howard wrote:
> > >>>Would there be benefit to keeping it more general: "XML based
> > >>>application and publishing framework and applications
> built on and
> > >>>in support of that framework".
> > >>
> > >>As for the charter, I agree with Goeff here: we need to keep it
> > >>general or we would need the board to change our charter
> every day.
> > >>
> > >>So, I would:
> > >>
> > >> 1) keep it language neutral: many people dislike java,
> but they can
> > >>leave with it if th application is worth the effort
> (think lisp and
> > >>emacs, for example)
> > >>
> > >> 2) keep it technology neutral (don't say XML/XSLT/SAX/DOM)
> > >>
> > >> 3) aim to identify the achitectural principles (modularity,
> > >>composability, separation of concerns, feature reductionism)
> > >
> > > If the board requires specific technology names, lets keep the
> > > technology choices low-key. We could talk about the
> architectural
> > > principles and then just mention that this is "currently
> implemented
> > > using" XYZ technologies. This would let us be specific about the
> > > technologies in use now, without creating a social contract to
> > > always use this same list of technologies.
> > >
> > > I hope the architectural principles are enough so this
> document will
> > > not have to specifically mention Java, SAX, etc. Like Stefano, I
> > > think Cocoon's main purpose is to make it possible to follow good
> > > design principles, such as SoC, modularity, etc., and pushing
> > > certain technologies is merely a side effect of needing
> to have an
> > > actual implementation of the framework.
> >
> > We should actually be distinguishing carefully here IMO between
> > Cocoon's purpose, and the purpose of the Cocoon TLP. I
> think we all
> > agree that for the foreseeable future, we should keep Cocoon proper
> > focused on XML pipelines, using Java. If someone wants to
> make a .Net
> > port of Cocoon and make it work using binary pipelines,
> using C#, then
> > we could make a sister project within the TLP called Cartoon or
> > something. It would be out of scope for Cocoon to do that, but not
> > necessarily for the TLP.
> >
> > Now, the question in my mind is "how far to we want the TLP to be
> > allowed to go away from what we now know of Cocoon?" so we
> don't get a
> > TLP that has to allow projects to do anything with any
> technology but
> > also don't have undue burden to innovate.
> >
> > Geoff
>
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Nicolas Toper <nt...@jouve.fr>.
Hi,
I've been following this thread and I've kept wondering: what is a TLP???
:=)
nicolas
Le Jeudi 05 Février 2004 16:17, Geoff Howard a écrit :
> Tim Larson wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 08:48:29AM -0500, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> >>On 5 Feb 2004, at 06:46, Geoff Howard wrote:
> >>>Would there be benefit to keeping it more general: "XML based
> >>>application and publishing framework and applications built on and in
> >>>support of that framework".
> >>
> >>As for the charter, I agree with Goeff here: we need to keep it general
> >>or we would need the board to change our charter every day.
> >>
> >>So, I would:
> >>
> >> 1) keep it language neutral: many people dislike java, but they can
> >>leave with it if th application is worth the effort (think lisp and
> >>emacs, for example)
> >>
> >> 2) keep it technology neutral (don't say XML/XSLT/SAX/DOM)
> >>
> >> 3) aim to identify the achitectural principles (modularity,
> >>composability, separation of concerns, feature reductionism)
> >
> > If the board requires specific technology names, lets keep the
> > technology choices low-key. We could talk about the architectural
> > principles and then just mention that this is "currently implemented
> > using" XYZ technologies. This would let us be specific about the
> > technologies in use now, without creating a social contract to always
> > use this same list of technologies.
> >
> > I hope the architectural principles are enough so this document
> > will not have to specifically mention Java, SAX, etc. Like Stefano,
> > I think Cocoon's main purpose is to make it possible to follow good
> > design principles, such as SoC, modularity, etc., and pushing certain
> > technologies is merely a side effect of needing to have an actual
> > implementation of the framework.
>
> We should actually be distinguishing carefully here IMO between Cocoon's
> purpose, and the purpose of the Cocoon TLP. I think we all agree that
> for the foreseeable future, we should keep Cocoon proper focused on XML
> pipelines, using Java. If someone wants to make a .Net port of Cocoon
> and make it work using binary pipelines, using C#, then we could make a
> sister project within the TLP called Cartoon or something. It would be
> out of scope for Cocoon to do that, but not necessarily for the TLP.
>
> Now, the question in my mind is "how far to we want the TLP to be
> allowed to go away from what we now know of Cocoon?" so we don't get a
> TLP that has to allow projects to do anything with any technology but
> also don't have undue burden to innovate.
>
> Geoff
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Geoff Howard <co...@leverageweb.com>.
Tim Larson wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 08:48:29AM -0500, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
>>On 5 Feb 2004, at 06:46, Geoff Howard wrote:
>>
>>>Would there be benefit to keeping it more general: "XML based
>>>application and publishing framework and applications built on and in
>>>support of that framework".
>>
>>As for the charter, I agree with Goeff here: we need to keep it general
>>or we would need the board to change our charter every day.
>>
>>So, I would:
>>
>> 1) keep it language neutral: many people dislike java, but they can
>>leave with it if th application is worth the effort (think lisp and
>>emacs, for example)
>>
>> 2) keep it technology neutral (don't say XML/XSLT/SAX/DOM)
>>
>> 3) aim to identify the achitectural principles (modularity,
>>composability, separation of concerns, feature reductionism)
>
>
> If the board requires specific technology names, lets keep the
> technology choices low-key. We could talk about the architectural
> principles and then just mention that this is "currently implemented
> using" XYZ technologies. This would let us be specific about the
> technologies in use now, without creating a social contract to always
> use this same list of technologies.
>
> I hope the architectural principles are enough so this document
> will not have to specifically mention Java, SAX, etc. Like Stefano,
> I think Cocoon's main purpose is to make it possible to follow good
> design principles, such as SoC, modularity, etc., and pushing certain
> technologies is merely a side effect of needing to have an actual
> implementation of the framework.
We should actually be distinguishing carefully here IMO between Cocoon's
purpose, and the purpose of the Cocoon TLP. I think we all agree that
for the foreseeable future, we should keep Cocoon proper focused on XML
pipelines, using Java. If someone wants to make a .Net port of Cocoon
and make it work using binary pipelines, using C#, then we could make a
sister project within the TLP called Cartoon or something. It would be
out of scope for Cocoon to do that, but not necessarily for the TLP.
Now, the question in my mind is "how far to we want the TLP to be
allowed to go away from what we now know of Cocoon?" so we don't get a
TLP that has to allow projects to do anything with any technology but
also don't have undue burden to innovate.
Geoff
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@reverycodes.com>.
Tim Larson wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 08:48:29AM -0500, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
>
>>As for the charter, I agree with Goeff here: we need to keep it general
>>or we would need the board to change our charter every day.
>>
>>
I suggest also to mention integration of different software into a
package which can be used to build web apps. Cocoon integrates lots of
Apache and non-Apache software together.
Vadim
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Tim Larson <ti...@keow.org>.
On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 08:48:29AM -0500, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
> On 5 Feb 2004, at 06:46, Geoff Howard wrote:
> >Would there be benefit to keeping it more general: "XML based
> >application and publishing framework and applications built on and in
> >support of that framework".
>
> As for the charter, I agree with Goeff here: we need to keep it general
> or we would need the board to change our charter every day.
>
> So, I would:
>
> 1) keep it language neutral: many people dislike java, but they can
> leave with it if th application is worth the effort (think lisp and
> emacs, for example)
>
> 2) keep it technology neutral (don't say XML/XSLT/SAX/DOM)
>
> 3) aim to identify the achitectural principles (modularity,
> composability, separation of concerns, feature reductionism)
If the board requires specific technology names, lets keep the
technology choices low-key. We could talk about the architectural
principles and then just mention that this is "currently implemented
using" XYZ technologies. This would let us be specific about the
technologies in use now, without creating a social contract to always
use this same list of technologies.
I hope the architectural principles are enough so this document
will not have to specifically mention Java, SAX, etc. Like Stefano,
I think Cocoon's main purpose is to make it possible to follow good
design principles, such as SoC, modularity, etc., and pushing certain
technologies is merely a side effect of needing to have an actual
implementation of the framework.
--Tim Larson
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Daniel Fagerstrom <da...@nada.kth.se>.
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
<snip/>
> As for the charter, I agree with Goeff here: we need to keep it general
> or we would need the board to change our charter every day.
>
> So, I would:
>
> 1) keep it language neutral: many people dislike java, but they can
> leave with it if th application is worth the effort (think lisp and
> emacs, for example)
>
> 2) keep it technology neutral (don't say XML/XSLT/SAX/DOM)
>
> 3) aim to identify the achitectural principles (modularity,
> composability, separation of concerns, feature reductionism)
>
To me this sound like FS on the mission statement level. I think we have
a strong consensus in keeping the main API:s in Cocoon as stable as
possible to protect our own and our users investments. And I guess also
because strong contracts actually is a requirement for making parallell
inovation possible. If the technolgical foundation can change at any
moment it is nearly impossible to build new layers above it.
If we change from Java to some other programing language I think that
changing our mission statement will be one of the smallest problem.
Likewise for replacing XML with something else. Although it in some
sense would be much cooler to base pipelines on a pull based protocoll,
leaving SAX would make all the current generators, transformers,
serializers as well as many other components obsolete.
IMHO we allready have some kind of "de facto", partly implicit mission
statement. Even if we don't agree about everything in Cocoon we agree
about quite a lot. I think we also share, at least to a large part, a
common vision about what Cocoon is and what it should become. We have a
strong project culture in Cocoon as well. I gueuss you have to accept a
rather large personal responsibillity for this situation ;)
I think we have much more to win than to lose in making this common
ground explicit. Booth for explaining for the rest of the world what
Cocoon is about and for our own focus.
> I know that we can always has the board to change the charter, and, to
> be honest, they don't care much as long as the community behaves well
> and cocoon has been a champion on that so they are very easy going with us.
>
> But the technological landscape might change dramattically in the
> future. We might substitute Java for another langauge if Microsoft buys
> Sun and kills it. We might move from SAX to something else. We might
> declare XSLT too complex. Who knows! Think about flowscript: would you
> have thought that javascript would be there side by side with the sitemap?
These are things that have time spans of several years from early ideas
to full technical support and community acceptance. We can change or add
to our mission statement in such cases.
> Let's not limit ourselves to the technology, that's just an instrument
> and moves along with time (and we should *not* be willing to avoid
> trying out new technological directions)
Of course we should continue to innovate, (I would lose my interest in
Cocoon if we stop ;) ), but if we look at our history we can see that it
takes a long time before an idea becomes a part of the core techinchal
identity of Cocoon.
> On the other hand, Cocoon *does* have an identity and it's because of
> its design principles:
>
> 1) composability instead of programmability
>
> 2) enforcing separation of concerns
>
> 3) minimizing overseparation of concerns
>
> 4) less is more, but no less than what you need
>
> I'm perfectly aware of the fact that these might be so broad that the
> board might not be happy with it, so I'm willing to get some tradeoffs
> and put some names and technology so that we can nail it down on where
> we are today, but these are my thoughts.
I think Cocoon has a quite strong technical identity as well, why not
describe that also. I think Stevens list is a good starting point. The
first few paragraphs in "what is Cocoon?" in the Cocoon documentation
could also be part of our mission statement.
Although I don't know anything about the board, our relation to it and
possible "political" implications, I think that a mission statement can
be something more than "something we state because the board requires
it", it is a statement addressed to the world and to ourselves about
what Cocoon is about.
You have never seemed afraid of stateing strong opinions about technical
matters and visions, why this sudden shyness in this particular case? ;)
/Daniel
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
On 5 Feb 2004, at 06:46, Geoff Howard wrote:
> Steven Noels wrote:
>> On 05 Feb 2004, at 12:10, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>>> We should be able to describe what we do in a more
>>>> generic sense. Look at the recent logging/portal TLP efforts. I've
>>>> even
>>>> been daydreaming whether the Cocoon portal shouldn't
>>>> cross-liaise/find
>>>> common grounds with the new portal TLP, but that's irrelevant to
>>>> this
>>>> discussion.
>>> Although it's irrelevant here, I wanted to propose to move the cocoon
>>> portal to the portal TLP as soon as the portal TLP is more concrete.
>> Cool - like that!
>>>> So, it's up to all of us to choose the correct categories. Good.
>> Yep - other suggestions?
>
> Would there be benefit to keeping it more general: "XML based
> application and publishing framework and applications built on and in
> support of that framework".
Glad to see this moving forward. Thanks, Steven.
I agree with Carsten that moving Cocoon Portal to the future
portal.apache.org makes perfect sense. I would suggest coming up with a
name for it (Cocoon Portal is good as long as you keep it inside)
[please no acroynims, not even recursive ones ;-)]
As for the charter, I agree with Goeff here: we need to keep it general
or we would need the board to change our charter every day.
So, I would:
1) keep it language neutral: many people dislike java, but they can
leave with it if th application is worth the effort (think lisp and
emacs, for example)
2) keep it technology neutral (don't say XML/XSLT/SAX/DOM)
3) aim to identify the achitectural principles (modularity,
composability, separation of concerns, feature reductionism)
I know that we can always has the board to change the charter, and, to
be honest, they don't care much as long as the community behaves well
and cocoon has been a champion on that so they are very easy going with
us.
But the technological landscape might change dramattically in the
future. We might substitute Java for another langauge if Microsoft buys
Sun and kills it. We might move from SAX to something else. We might
declare XSLT too complex. Who knows! Think about flowscript: would you
have thought that javascript would be there side by side with the
sitemap?
Let's not limit ourselves to the technology, that's just an instrument
and moves along with time (and we should *not* be willing to avoid
trying out new technological directions)
On the other hand, Cocoon *does* have an identity and it's because of
its design principles:
1) composability instead of programmability
2) enforcing separation of concerns
3) minimizing overseparation of concerns
4) less is more, but no less than what you need
I'm perfectly aware of the fact that these might be so broad that the
board might not be happy with it, so I'm willing to get some tradeoffs
and put some names and technology so that we can nail it down on where
we are today, but these are my thoughts.
--
Stefano.
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Geoff Howard <co...@leverageweb.com>.
Steven Noels wrote:
> On 05 Feb 2004, at 12:10, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
>>> We should be able to describe what we do in a more
>>> generic sense. Look at the recent logging/portal TLP efforts. I've even
>>> been daydreaming whether the Cocoon portal shouldn't cross-liaise/find
>>> common grounds with the new portal TLP, but that's irrelevant to this
>>> discussion.
>
>
>> Although it's irrelevant here, I wanted to propose to move the cocoon
>> portal to the portal TLP as soon as the portal TLP is more concrete.
>
>
> Cool - like that!
>
>>> So, it's up to all of us to choose the correct categories. Good.
>
>
> Yep - other suggestions?
Would there be benefit to keeping it more general: "XML based
application and publishing framework and applications built on and in
support of that framework".
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
On 05 Feb 2004, at 12:10, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>> We should be able to describe what we do in a more
>> generic sense. Look at the recent logging/portal TLP efforts. I've
>> even
>> been daydreaming whether the Cocoon portal shouldn't cross-liaise/find
>> common grounds with the new portal TLP, but that's irrelevant to this
>> discussion.
> Although it's irrelevant here, I wanted to propose to move the cocoon
> portal to the portal TLP as soon as the portal TLP is more concrete.
Cool - like that!
>> So, it's up to all of us to choose the correct categories. Good.
Yep - other suggestions?
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source Java & XML An Orixo Member
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
RE: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Steven Noels wrote:
>
> On 05 Feb 2004, at 11:54, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
> > My first thought while reading this was that I'm really unsure if we
> > need
> > such limitations. Honestly, I don't know.
>
> Well, it has been repeatedly suggested by the board, and I think their
> point is fair.
Ah,ok, wasn't aware of this.
> We should be able to describe what we do in a more
> generic sense. Look at the recent logging/portal TLP efforts. I've even
> been daydreaming whether the Cocoon portal shouldn't cross-liaise/find
> common grounds with the new portal TLP, but that's irrelevant to this
> discussion.
Although it's irrelevant here, I wanted to propose to move the cocoon
portal to the portal TLP as soon as the portal TLP is more concrete.
>
> > What happens if we "forget" something in this mission statement?
>
> Then we need to change and defend the chance to the board. No biggies,
> me thinks.
>
Ok.
So, it's up to all of us to choose the correct categories. Good.
Carsten
Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
On 05 Feb 2004, at 11:54, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> My first thought while reading this was that I'm really unsure if we
> need
> such limitations. Honestly, I don't know.
Well, it has been repeatedly suggested by the board, and I think their
point is fair. We should be able to describe what we do in a more
generic sense. Look at the recent logging/portal TLP efforts. I've even
been daydreaming whether the Cocoon portal shouldn't cross-liaise/find
common grounds with the new portal TLP, but that's irrelevant to this
discussion.
> What happens if we "forget" something in this mission statement?
Then we need to change and defend the chance to the board. No biggies,
me thinks.
> And if we really need this, at least a category for tools is missing.
+1
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source Java & XML An Orixo Member
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
RE: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
My first thought while reading this was that I'm really unsure if we need
such limitations. Honestly, I don't know.
What happens if we "forget" something in this mission statement?
And if we really need this, at least a category for tools is missing.
Carsten
Steven Noels wrote:
>
> Howdie,
>
> when establishing the Cocoon TLP with the ASF board, we received the
> comment that the then-submitted mission statement of the Cocoon TLP was
> self-referencing or recursive, i.e. the Cocoon TLP had as a goal the
> prosperity of the Cocoon project, with "Cocoon" not being properly
> defined as a tangible goal on its own. So if the Cocoon community would
> decide now to start developing a J2EE container (godforbid), we would
> be allowed to by our mission statement.
>
> I'd like to submit a better mission statement for the upcoming board
> meeting, keeping in mind future subprojects like Lenya and Forrest (or
> blocks being spun off as subprojects such as the portal). Looking at
> what differentiates us from other technologies and frameworks, I feel
> we should include notions as:
>
> - Java-based (or do we want our mission statement to be
> technology-neutral?)
> - XML/SAX-based pipelines
> - the sitemap as a centralized request handling configuration mechanism
> through decoupling of URI space with request response construction
> - different runtime environments (Servlet/CLI/Portlet)
> - technical frameworks such as continuation-based flow control, form
> handling, templating transformers
> - functional frameworks such as the portal, linotype
> - applications based on top of all this such as Lenya & Forrest
>
> I'll try to wordsmith this into a short mission statement, but I'd like
> to hear whether this categorization makes sense to you.
>
> Cheers,
>