cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Lundquist>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Woody scratchpad area
Date Mon, 16 Feb 2004 19:45:03 GMT

On Feb 12, 2004, at 2:24 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:

> How
> can an unstable block be the recommended approach?

That's easy.

What this tells me as a user is that I have a choice between (a) using 
something whose interfaces cannot be not locked down yet, or (b) 
choosing a dead-end technology.

Choosing (a) means that I will have more integration issues whenever I 
take an upgrade to Cooon.  So there are cascading tradeoffs i.e., 
choosing introduces a tradeoff that will influence my decisions 
regarding Cocoon upgrades).

Choosing (b) means choosing something that's on the path to 
deprecation, which means that support will decrease... fixes will be 
low-priority, improvements unlikely, and ultimately even  the 
community's knowledge of it will evaporate.

I also figure that if other technologies are to be deprecated in favor 
of Cocoon Forms or ("Cforms" or whatever... neé "Woody"), that probably 
means those technologies are inferior, so choosing (b) will mean having 
to deal with hassles that Woody was designed to solve.

It also tells me that the developers regard any time that might be 
spent making the (b) technologies nicer, fixing them, or investigating 
user issues with them is better spent contributing toward the full 
beatification of Cocoon Forms :-).  (I guess I sort of said that 
already, under "support will decrease...").  But this is valuable 
knowledge to have when deciding on approaches.

All this is what I think when I read "Woody, though unstable, is the 
recommended way for forms handling".

— Mark

View raw message