cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Geoff Howard <>
Subject Re: on better release and version management
Date Fri, 19 Sep 2003 13:54:45 GMT
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> On Friday, Sep 19, 2003, at 15:05 Europe/Rome, Geoff Howard wrote:
>> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>>> Steven Noels wrote:


>>> The only problem is if "real blocks" require to modify the directory 
>>> structure of blocks. I'm not sure of this, as I mostly envision it as 
>>> an augmentation of the current structure, e.g. with a new "web" 
>>> directory that would contain the block's sitemap and resources.
>> I don't think this will be necessary - at least Stefano certainly 
>> didn't seem to think it necessary because he was planning on doing all 
>> this right in 2.1.
> After a little more thinking, I think that we should avoid placing block 
> code in cocoon-2.2 alltogether because we need to start talking about 
> the 'community process' of accepting new blocks, where they fit, how 
> they get 'certified' and all these things.
> So, I agree: let's make cocoon-2.2 and keep all the block code out for 
> now (the build process can construct the code from the cocoon-2.1 
> repository.
> This leaves open a single question: where do we put the various 
> block.xml descriptor files? I would say cocoon-2.1 for now and later 
> moved them into a new cocoon-blocks module.

Hmmm... I've been assuming that the way a block actually gets coded may 
need to change in order to interact with other real blocks, etc.  If 
this is not the case, then the whole issue of back-compatibility of 
blocks goes away and keeping them in 2.1 is fine.

OTOH if it is the case, then we're back to needing an uninhibited way to 
experiment with them, and the block.xml and the whole block content may 
need to be duplicated in 2.2 until cocoon-blocks is worked out.  But if 
we agree that any blocks in 2.2 will be kicked out later either to find 
a home at cocoon-blocks or elsewhere our hands still will be free.


View raw message