Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-avalon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 4374 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2004 22:55:05 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Mar 2004 22:55:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 58831 invoked by uid 500); 3 Mar 2004 22:54:50 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-avalon-dev-archive@avalon.apache.org Received: (qmail 58758 invoked by uid 500); 3 Mar 2004 22:54:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@avalon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Avalon Developers List" Reply-To: "Avalon Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@avalon.apache.org Received: (qmail 58744 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2004 22:54:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail1.fw-sj.sony.com) (160.33.82.68) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Mar 2004 22:54:49 -0000 Received: from mail1.sgo.in.sel.sony.com (mail1.sgo.in.sel.sony.com [43.130.1.111]) by mail1.fw-sj.sony.com (8.12.10/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i23Msufp025419 for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 22:54:56 GMT Received: by mail1.sgo.in.sel.sony.com id WAA14143; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 22:37:32 GMT Received: by us-sd-xims-1.am.sony.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 14:37:32 -0800 Message-ID: <03334AAF1DF8D2119B1000A0C9E32F58065EFBFE@us-pb-xmsg-2.am.sony.com> From: "Farr, Aaron" To: "'Avalon Developers List'" Subject: RE: [avalon] roadmap - library criteria Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 14:37:41 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > -----Original Message----- > From: Carsten Ziegeler [mailto:cziegeler@s-und-n.de] > Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 5:30 PM > To: 'Avalon Developers List' > Subject: RE: [avalon] roadmap - library criteria > > Aaron Farr wrote: > > > > Also, I would like to look into the Cocoon base again (it's > > been a _long_ > > time) and see exactly where and how you're using > > ECM/Fortress. Is Fortress being used in the latest release(s)? > > > No :) The latest release is in the 2.1.x branch (2.1.4) and still > uses ECM - which is for us absolutely perfect by the way. The only > annoying thing is that we have one big configuration file for > all components. Not sure if moving to Fortress or Merlin would really help with that. > The new version 2.2 which development has started some months ago > and which will take some more months to get finished starts using > Fortress. But it's not fully migrated yet due to the configuration > problems I mentioned. If we move completly to Fortress we are > not compatible to 2.1.x. If we are compatible, we could stay with > ECM anyway :) (A little bit simplified but more or less this is > the current problem). Yeah. I see the problem. Preserving configuration file format would be important from a user perspective. I imagine most Cocoon users don't really care about ECM/Fortress/Merlin, but if we tell them their configuration files need rewritten... :-) Anyway, I'll try to find some time to look through the code. It would help me understand how the changes we're discussing could affect some of our users. J. Aaron Farr SONY ELECTRONICS DDP-CIM (724) 696-7653 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org