Growing, overall consistency and deprecation (was Re: Janino, an embedded java compiler)

[Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>]

Niclas Hedhman wrote:

>On Friday 03 December 2004 22:23, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>  
>
>>Ok, re-read this with a [OT/RT/FS] prefix in the subject. I have not
>>said I *want* this to go into Cocoon.
>>    
>>
>
>Sorry I chose to make the reply on your mail, and not one of the other feature 
>proposals where it perhaps made more sense... 
>
>Just wanted to raise a small flag. The creep is scary because one by one, 
>everything makes sense but looking at the accummulated total, I am seeing a 
>picture that scares people away.
>  
>

I both agree and disagree: Cocoon is a complex beast, we all know that. 
And despite my long term involvement in its development, there are areas 
that are totally obscure to me, and some features I don't like. Even 
some I wrote myself ; we all evolve over time.

However, the current discussion around templates and expressions 
language is not meant to add yet another feature to Cocoon. It is meant 
to provide a single solution for needs that are currently implemented in 
Cocoon, but duplicated in many places with as many variations as there 
are duplications, as each component (or developper) has reimplemented 
the feature without really taking care of an overall consistency of the 
Cocoon system.

Templates and expression languages are system-wide concern, and not only 
concerns of individual high-level components. So we must define some 
system-wide architecture to hold implementations of these concerns. Now 
do we have to sacrifice diversity for this, by imposing e.g. a single 
expression language? We cannot. Cocoon users form a very diverse 
community, using the platform in diverse environments, even for a single 
person. I want a bean-property EL when I use Hibernate, but also a XPath 
EL when I use XML documents. But I don't want JXTG, XSP, CForms and 
others to each either impose a particular EL or each provide a different 
way of choosing the EL. Making a choice should be possible, but in a 
consistent manner.

So yes, new features will be added. But just like CForms (who's still 
using XMLForm?), these new features should become mainstream and 
deprecate their older equivalent.

Now the problem also comes from the combination of a necessary backward 
compatibility that requires us to keep deprecated features and the lack 
of docs that indicate what features are the current mainstream ones and 
those that are only here because of history.

Maybe we should be less shy to deprecate things. But the problem is that 
deprecation means future deletion, which also scares people as it 
doesn't give the image of something stable. Maybe some "mainstream-ness" 
classification would allow people new to Cocoon to more easily find 
their way into the system, while still giving the necessary code and 
documentation to people having "legacy" Cocoon applications.

What do you think?

Sylvain

-- 
Sylvain Wallez                                  Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain           http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }

Re: Growing, overall consistency and deprecation (was Re: Janino, an embedded java compiler)

[Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>]

On Saturday 04 December 2004 01:50, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:

> In short: you should not obtain your knowledge from reading the dev-
> list and we are solidifying many solutions into a recommended one, not
> adding more things.

I don't. I try to obtain it by using it. But following the dev@ is really 
good, since it gives an upper-hand in understanding the "intentions" which 
makes most stuff (like Flows) a lot easier to grasp as a user.

And Yes, I am *very* pleased with the documentation progress. All kudos to 
those who work on it !!! And also the whole "startup demo" package makes it a 
lot more "consumable" (learn by example - and no example means not use it ).

> And don't worry, my FS alarms might be slower to react these days (do to
> the fact that I have a day job now) but are never turned off ;-)

Good to know :o)

Cheers
Niclas
-- 
   +------//-------------------+
  / http://www.dpml.net       /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+------//-------------------+

Re: Growing, overall consistency and deprecation (was Re: Janino, an embedded java compiler)

[Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>]

Niclas Hedhman wrote:

>On Friday 03 December 2004 23:22, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
><snip />
>
>Well put.
>
>  
>
>>Maybe we should be less shy to deprecate things. But the problem is that
>>deprecation means future deletion, which also scares people as it
>>doesn't give the image of something stable. Maybe some "mainstream-ness"
>>classification would allow people new to Cocoon to more easily find
>>their way into the system, while still giving the necessary code and
>>documentation to people having "legacy" Cocoon applications.
>>    
>>
>
>Yes that sounds very reasonable. 
><warning type="analogy" >
>"Not recommended for new designs" it is called in the electronics industry. 
>That means that the part is manufactured, but there are better and cheaper 
>ones around, and by natural selection the part will be of no demand in long 
>enough time. When the demand is low enough, a final production run is made 
>(deprecation) and all customers are informed, and can order any quantity for 
>their own stock keeping for spare parts or whatever.
></warning>
>  
>

This is a very good analogy.

>So, back to Cocoon; If you have a system where you can mark "not recommended 
>for new designs", and then at the point of deprecation that 'part' could 
>moved out of the standard dist, docs, discussion sphere, you are better set 
>for a graceful end-of-life.
>  
>

I totally agree with you.

>Mind you, these are non-urgent stuff, and I guess really noone's itch.
>  
>

Well, this is non-urgent as old things don't need work as bug fixes or 
new feature do, but the fact that we are discussing here shows that 
there is an itch.

Now scratching may not be that complicated: let's just add a new 
attribute managed by the SitemapTask to automatically indicate the 
"freshness" status of a component in the docs. That can be a first step, 
the next one being writing overview docs explaining best practices.

Sylvain

-- 
Sylvain Wallez                                  Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain           http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }

Re: Growing, overall consistency and deprecation (was Re: Janino, an embedded java compiler)

[Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>]

Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Friday 03 December 2004 23:22, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> 
> <snip />
> 
> Well put.
> 
> 
>>Maybe we should be less shy to deprecate things. But the problem is that
>>deprecation means future deletion, which also scares people as it
>>doesn't give the image of something stable. Maybe some "mainstream-ness"
>>classification would allow people new to Cocoon to more easily find
>>their way into the system, while still giving the necessary code and
>>documentation to people having "legacy" Cocoon applications.
> 
> 
> Yes that sounds very reasonable. 
> <warning type="analogy" >
> "Not recommended for new designs" it is called in the electronics industry. 
> That means that the part is manufactured, but there are better and cheaper 
> ones around, and by natural selection the part will be of no demand in long 
> enough time. When the demand is low enough, a final production run is made 
> (deprecation) and all customers are informed, and can order any quantity for 
> their own stock keeping for spare parts or whatever.
> </warning>
> 
> So, back to Cocoon; If you have a system where you can mark "not recommended 
> for new designs", and then at the point of deprecation that 'part' could 
> moved out of the standard dist, docs, discussion sphere, you are better set 
> for a graceful end-of-life.
> 
> Mind you, these are non-urgent stuff, and I guess really noone's itch.

Niclas,

Cocoon is what it is because we are not afraid of changing our mind and 
to collectively discuss things on the list and we don't act before we 
have consensus.

Sure, FS creeps in (and I'm fighting it against taglibs, the ultimate FS 
evil in my eyes, even Jelly's author moved away from it ashamed) but 
that's why we have discussions.

We lack documentation and best practices and efforts are underway to 
solidify those (our documentation is a lot better than it used to be).

In short: you should not obtain your knowledge from reading the dev- 
list and we are solidifying many solutions into a recommended one, not 
adding more things.

And don't worry, my FS alarms might be slower to react these days (do to 
the fact that I have a day job now) but are never turned off ;-)

-- 
Stefano.

Re: Growing, overall consistency and deprecation (was Re: Janino, an embedded java compiler)

[Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>]

On Friday 03 December 2004 23:22, Sylvain Wallez wrote:

<snip />

Well put.

> Maybe we should be less shy to deprecate things. But the problem is that
> deprecation means future deletion, which also scares people as it
> doesn't give the image of something stable. Maybe some "mainstream-ness"
> classification would allow people new to Cocoon to more easily find
> their way into the system, while still giving the necessary code and
> documentation to people having "legacy" Cocoon applications.

Yes that sounds very reasonable. 
<warning type="analogy" >
"Not recommended for new designs" it is called in the electronics industry. 
That means that the part is manufactured, but there are better and cheaper 
ones around, and by natural selection the part will be of no demand in long 
enough time. When the demand is low enough, a final production run is made 
(deprecation) and all customers are informed, and can order any quantity for 
their own stock keeping for spare parts or whatever.
</warning>

So, back to Cocoon; If you have a system where you can mark "not recommended 
for new designs", and then at the point of deprecation that 'part' could 
moved out of the standard dist, docs, discussion sphere, you are better set 
for a graceful end-of-life.

Mind you, these are non-urgent stuff, and I guess really noone's itch.


Cheers
Niclas
-- 
   +------//-------------------+
  / http://www.dpml.net       /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+------//-------------------+