cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Reinhard Pötz <reinh...@apache.org>
Subject Re: From Woody to CocoonForms
Date Fri, 05 Mar 2004 14:36:39 GMT
Tim Larson wrote:

>On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 03:15:56PM +0100, Reinhard P?tz wrote:
>  
>
>>Tim Larson wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 03:05:38PM +0100, Marc Portier wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>H.vanderLinden@MI.unimaas.nl wrote:
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In the next few days I want (no promise ;-) to start with renaming

>>>>>>>Woody to CocoonForms. First I want to move the _core_ which means

>>>>>>>that I want to make one simple example run.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>namespaces:
>>>>>>>http://apache.org/cocoon/woody/definition/1.0
>>>>>>>-->
>>>>>>>http://apache.org/cocoon/forms/definition/1.0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Are there other 'forms' types? Maybe you could use "cforms" since
that 
>>>>>>is the most often used abbreviation and to set it apart from other

>>>>>>form types.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>+1 (although I'm one of those that will miss "woody")
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>another +1 to 'cforms' over 'forms'
>>>>(and joining in on the 'will miss the original')
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>+1 'cforms' instead of just 'forms'
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>I'm +1 for "forms" only - as Vadim pointed out, it's "Cocoon" is obvious 
>>because it's within the Cocoon CVS.
>>WDOT?
>>    
>>
>
>I could be wrong (that happens often enough), but what if we eventually
>replace Woody/Cocoon Forms with something better?  If it is very
>different then IMHO just a namespace version change 1.0->2.0, etc. may
>not make a lot of sense.  A new name may be in order at that point.
>If we start the pattern with CForms then we have a non-fantasy name,
>while still leaving room for future names for new forms frameworks
>(Super Forms -> SForms, etc.)
>
>I'll be quiet now :)
>  
>
That's a point, of course. OTOH we decided that this community will 
support only one forms framework in the future. We will deprecate 
everything else very soon.
Suppose that somebody starts to implement another forms framework and we 
vote that this will be the official forms framwork in the future. This 
would mean that we deprecate the former forms framework in favour of the 
new one. The new one will have the name Cocoon Forms 2.0 and will be in 
the forms block.

I'm +1 for "forms" because this makes it very clear that there is only 
one and not more.

-- 
Reinhard


Mime
View raw message