cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "French Touch">
Subject RE: strange resons not going beta
Date Fri, 30 Mar 2001 09:46:42 GMT
Hi all,

I really think Cocoon 2 shouldn't be beta before CA is implemented.

The origin of Cocoon is SoC (see,
and I think that without CA we break the SoC, Cocoon 2 for the moment give
you tools to build a great system but we cannot say our five contracts are
respected. For me CA is the killer application I don't see in other engines,
and It's the main reason I closely follow the Cocoon project. I really do
understand that some companies are interested for a beta version but having
a beta without the killer app is a mistake IMHO.

If we take a look at Cocoon 2 doc we see 5 important parts:
- Passive APIs vs. Active APIs
- Reactors Reconsidered
- Management Considerations
- Overlapping contexts and Chain Mapping
- Pre-compilation, Pre-generation and Caching

Cocoon 2 seems to be very close from all this goals, the only one missing
without CA is Management Considerations, some companies seems to have their
add-on that implement a management system but it would be great if Cocoon 2
provides it. I really think that SoC is a more important goal than speed

I am not a developer therefore I haven't code a single line in C2 but I
follow with great interest a project that for once seems to be fixed on
users and It's not one of those open-source project made by developer for
developer (I have no problem with that btw).


Martin Rogard
Creative Director
Vibes Online

-----Original Message-----
From: []On
Behalf Of Giacomo Pati
Sent: jeudi 29 mars 2001 23:13
To: Cocoon dev
Subject: Re: strange resons not going beta

Ok, let me summarize:

----------------------------------- oo


Berin Loritsch wrote:
> Cocoon 2 is fast enough on my test systems and
> scalable enough on my systems that cache isn't critical.

Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>    Caching: We suggest implementing a first version of caching based on
the various
>             suggestions in this list.
>             We would volunteer to implement this by the end of April.

Donald Ball wrote:
> i dunno. c2 is pretty fast in and of itself.

My oppinions
> Most of my use of C2 is dynamic in most cases so caching is not a issue at

==> Caching isn't critical to enter beta state.

----------------------------------- oo

Content Aggregation (CA)

Berin Loritsch wrote:
> Aggregation would be *nice* and would make my life easier, but they aren't
> *critical*.

Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> - the basics for content aggregation have already been implemented and so
>   this feature in a next release should not be difficult.

Donald Ball wrote:
> content aggregation would be very helpful before going beta. in my mind,
> beta code is supposed to be largely stable in two ways - it shouldn't
> crash all the time for inexplicable reasons, and the API and configuration
> files' formats shouldn't be changing wildly. if we can add content
> aggregation to the sitemap, i think we'll be at a point at which we could
> get a beta release out there for people to play with. and really, how hard
> can content aggregation really be compared with the very difficult
> problems already solved?

My oppinions
> CA seems to me a thing that could be realized if two or three volunteers
> can stick together, solve the last design uncertainties with help from the

==> CA is a nice feature and should eventually be realized before going

----------------------------------- oo

Some reasons to go beta:

Berin Loritsch wrote:
> To my superiors, upgrading to at least
> a Beta status would be a feature they can sell better than anything
> dubbed "alpha" quality.
> The bottom line is that when Cocoon finally upgrades from "Alpha" to
> "Beta" it upgrades from a "near impossible"/"difficult" sale to a
> "mildly difficult"/"possible" sale.  It is a core piece of technology
> that we are selling to our client, so it will add that bolster of
> confidence that will be needed when we present the final product to
> them.

Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> The main problem we find when convincing customers to implement a C2-based
> is the fact that C2 is still alpha and relatively unknown.
> - if we are able to quickly release a beta version of C2 then we should be
able to get
>   more developers involved and therefore speed up the addition of new

My reasons:
> I'm in the same situation as Berin and Carsten and I do know the
> using an alpha package as base for customers systems. Thus, going beta
> help me selling C2 better/easier.

----------------------------------- oo

I see CA implementable by two or three people who can stick together,
solve the last uncertainties with help from the list and have them work
on different part of CA. I've allready commited myself to refactor the
ResourcePipeline and the sitemap to enable the basics for CA. Still
missing is a way to request the sitemap for an XMLPipeline (see my other
mail about refactoring) and an AggregationGenerator which understands a
syntax for aggregation (several proposals/suggestions available). All
this things doesn't affect the sitemap semantic/syntax at all. So in my
oppinion the sitemaps syntax and semantics is quite stable.

Ok, lets vote on the following:

Should we implement CA first before going beta?

Should we go beta at (ie.) 1st May (Carstens suggestion)?

Should we go beta now?


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, email:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, email:

View raw message