Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-cocoon-dev-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 26302 invoked by uid 500); 13 Jun 2003 11:43:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 26287 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2003 11:43:01 -0000 Received: from mail.s-und-n.de (212.8.217.2) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 13 Jun 2003 11:43:01 -0000 Received: from mail.s-und-n.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.s-und-n.de (postfix) with ESMTP id 33341B17EE for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:43:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from notes.sundn.de (ntsrv5.sundn.de [10.10.2.10]) by mail.s-und-n.de (postfix) with ESMTP id 151E2B1653 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:43:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hw0386 ([10.10.2.36]) by notes.sundn.de (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.8) with SMTP id 2003061313425963:17781 ; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:42:59 +0200 From: "Carsten Ziegeler" To: Subject: RE: Release Plan for 2.1 Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:44:34 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 In-Reply-To: <3EE9A534.23603.D5E4FE4@localhost> Importance: Normal X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on PBSN1/Systeme und Netzwerke(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at 13.06.2003 13:42:59, Serialize by Router on PBSN1/Systeme und Netzwerke(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at 13.06.2003 13:43:00, Serialize complete at 13.06.2003 13:43:00 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Upayavira > > On 13 Jun 2003 at 8:35, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > > > AFAIK, the only real thing missing for 2.1 is the FOM implementation. > > The question is now, is someone already working on it resp. should we > > wait for the release until it's finished? > > What is actually required to fix the FOM implementation? Is it > just refactoring some of > the main Cocoon classes to follow the FOM? If it isn't too hard, > I might try to find time > for some of it. > I think its refactoring and adding some functionality. As a starting point you can look at this thread: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=105401789500001&r=1&w=2 Carsten