cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joerg Heinicke <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Woody scratchpad area
Date Thu, 12 Feb 2004 22:14:02 GMT
On 12.02.2004 22:04, Ralph Goers wrote:

> Frankly, I don't believe Woody should have been in 2.1 as a block - it
> should have been in the scratchpad.  The number of fundamental changes that
> have been made to it clearly indicate that it wasn't stable when 2.1.0 was
> released.  It should never be tolerated that something that is "released"
> (i.e. in core or in a block) is allowed to have its interface or fundamental
> behavior change from one minor release to the next.  It could have been
> moved from the scratchpad into a block at a minor release when it was deemed
> ready.

IMO you are wrong here to a certain extend. We introduced the blocks to 
have development independent on the core. Therefore we also introduced 
the status of a block, which can be stable, unstable or deprecated at 
the moment (see the gump descriptor in the Cocoon root dir). This gump 
descriptor is transformed into the file with the hint 
on stable and unstable (but all are included by default). But at latest 
at build time you get a warning about the status if it is unstable and 
what it means. So IMO nobody can complain about any changes for an 
unstable block.

> I started development with 2.1.0 and found
> I had to modify everything when I upgraded to 2.1.3 simply because of the
> conversion from Composable to Serviceable.  IMO, that should never happen.

Here you are right, for the core this should not happen. We (and maybe 
me in the first place) have not taken care about this issue.


View raw message