cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Antonio Gallardo" <agalla...@agssa.net>
Subject Re: Switching rhino implementation
Date Mon, 01 Nov 2004 21:35:51 GMT
Hi:

First of all congratulations to Igor Bukanov from the Mozilla community,
to you and to the other people that make this posible!

To answer your question is hard because:

1-We have nearly 1 month waiting for the 2.1.6 release.
2-Same as Ralph: If the changes don't break beackward compatibility go
ahead and make (1.a), if not, I think we can also release with something
like:

<map:flow language="js"/> <!-- The new implementation -->

Of course this tag will be just for the 2.1.6 version and then later we
can merge both, so in 2.2 will be the same:

<map:flow language="javascript"/> or

<map:flow language="js"/>

In the case of (2) I see to situations based on the backward compatibility
of the new rhino:

2.A- The new rhino is backward compatible: We can remove the old
implementation.
2.B. The new rhino is NOT backward compatible: We need to deprecate the
old one and mantain both libraries.

My POV is we need to move to the new library as soon as posible. I really
will like to see the Cocoon flow engine using the new JS 2.0 features! ;-)

Best Regards,

Antonio Gallardo


Reinhard Poetz dijo:
>
> I'm going to integrate the new Rhino+cont implementation in the next few
> days
> and plan to support the old and the new implementation, at least in 2.1. I
> wonder ...
>
> 1. What do we want to call the new implementation (I mean the language
>     name in <map:flow language="???"/>).
>
>    a.)  call the new implementation "javascript" and tell our users
>         that if they have problems they can use "javascript-legacy"
>         or some other alternative name for the old implementation?
>
>         If so, shouldn't I wait for 2.1.6 and do the integration then?
>
>    b.)  keep "javascript" as the name of the old implementation and
>         find a new name for the new implementation?
>
> 2. If we deprecate the old flowscript implementation in 2.1 - do we have
> to
>     keep it in 2.2 or can I remove it?
>
>
> I would wait with switching to the new flowscript implementation until the
> release of 2.1.6 Then we have a few months to test it in branch and trunk
> and if
> everything goes well I would deprecate the old one and rename it to
> "javascript-legacy" and the new impl should be the default language.
>
> In 2.2 I would remove the old implementation completly.
>
> WDOT?
>
> --
> Reinhard
>


Mime
View raw message