cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicolas Toper <nto...@jouve.fr>
Subject Re: Goal of the Cocoon TLP
Date Thu, 05 Feb 2004 16:08:02 GMT
Hi,

I've been following this thread and I've kept wondering: what is a TLP???

:=)

nicolas

Le Jeudi 05 Février 2004 16:17, Geoff Howard a écrit :
> Tim Larson wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 08:48:29AM -0500, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> >>On 5 Feb 2004, at 06:46, Geoff Howard wrote:
> >>>Would there be benefit to keeping it more general: "XML based
> >>>application and publishing framework and applications built on and in
> >>>support of that framework".
> >>
> >>As for the charter, I agree with Goeff here: we need to keep it general
> >>or we would need the board to change our charter every day.
> >>
> >>So, I would:
> >>
> >> 1) keep it language neutral: many people dislike java, but they can
> >>leave with it if th application is worth the effort (think lisp and
> >>emacs, for example)
> >>
> >> 2) keep it technology neutral (don't say XML/XSLT/SAX/DOM)
> >>
> >> 3) aim to identify the achitectural principles (modularity,
> >>composability, separation of concerns, feature reductionism)
> >
> > If the board requires specific technology names, lets keep the
> > technology choices low-key.  We could talk about the architectural
> > principles and then just mention that this is "currently implemented
> > using" XYZ technologies.  This would let us be specific about the
> > technologies in use now, without creating a social contract to always
> > use this same list of technologies.
> >
> > I hope the architectural principles are enough so this document
> > will not have to specifically mention Java, SAX, etc.  Like Stefano,
> > I think Cocoon's main purpose is to make it possible to follow good
> > design principles, such as SoC, modularity, etc., and pushing certain
> > technologies is merely a side effect of needing to have an actual
> > implementation of the framework.
>
> We should actually be distinguishing carefully here IMO between Cocoon's
> purpose, and the purpose of the Cocoon TLP.  I think we all agree that
> for the foreseeable future, we should keep Cocoon proper focused on XML
> pipelines, using Java.  If someone wants to make a .Net port of Cocoon
> and make it work using binary pipelines, using C#, then we could make a
> sister project within the TLP called Cartoon or something.  It would be
> out of scope for Cocoon to do that, but not necessarily for the TLP.
>
> Now, the question in my mind is "how far to we want the TLP to be
> allowed to go away from what we now know of Cocoon?" so we don't get a
> TLP that has to allow projects to do anything with any technology but
> also don't have undue burden to innovate.
>
> Geoff


Mime
View raw message