cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Geoff Howard <coc...@leverageweb.com>
Subject Re: [RT] Starting 2.2 (was going to be "The Project Formerly Known As Cocoon")
Date Thu, 28 Aug 2003 22:06:25 GMT
Tony Collen wrote:
> Geoff Howard wrote:
> 
>> What about renaming the next release to an unpronounceable set of 
>> symbols, like Prince, or that Led Zepplin album?  I'd suggest "!&#".
> 
> 
> How about: Cocoon <Interrobang>
> 
> It would be pronounced, "Cocoon?!"

Actually, my proposal could be pronounced "bang and pound" which might 
not be positive...

>>> In all seriousness, I'm all for 2.2, but what sorts of loose ends are 
>>> there that could be tied up for 2.1.x?  Howabout a push to clear out 
>>> some bugs from bugzilla?
>>
>> Me too, but a push for bug fix (and I'd like to see a docs blitz) 
>> wouldn't need to hold up creating the repository and working out the 
>> best way of working two trees at once would it?
> 
> Hrm, actually a docs push would be more like it, since I was prodded by 
> a few people to do up some nice InputModule docs, so I am guilty as 
> charged :)  I just didn't want to see new stuff get started and have 
> older issues unresolved.  I don't see why we'd need to postpone a new 
> repository, really, I'd just hate to see things forgotten about.

Agreed.

> Side note: Is a build of 2.1.x or 2.2 going to be using the new 
> forrest-style skins for the docs anytime soon?  It's kind of nasty 
> seeing the old site design when I build docs from the current CVS.

I asked about this before and got the impression that some people are 
getting the forrest look.  Near as I can tell, it falls back to the old 
xml.apache "metal" look if forrest is not downloaded at ../xml-forrest 
or as specified in build.properties?  So far I've been too lazy to 
confirm.  I'd much rather be able to import the stylesheets, etc. which 
would be needed but I've been too lazy for that as well.

>> By the way, I thought we were planning on breaking from ECM in 2.2 
>> because it would make blocks easier among other great benefits.  Is 
>> this still a thought?  That would certainly make a new repo an 
>> attractive thing.
> 
> I'm not a hugely knowledgeable on Avalon, so I'm not sure about the 
> issues surrounding it.  Just when I thought I'd start to learn Avalon 
> stuff, the carpet gets pulled out from under me! :)

Hopefully it's not as bad as that.  Avalon's not going away, just the 
implementation that's changing...

Geoff


Mime
View raw message