cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Antonio Gallardo" <>
Subject Re: [proposal] move cforms in core
Date Thu, 24 Feb 2005 13:21:18 GMT
On Jue, 24 de Febrero de 2005, 5:53, Joerg Heinicke dijo:
> Stefano Mazzocchi <stefano <at>> writes:
>> > Just like other people, I think distinguishing "core blocks" is a good
>> > thing to show people where to look at while still keeping the core
>> small.
>> I'm sorry, but I think the "core block" idea is plain wrong and smells
>> of over componentization.
>> If we *all* agree that something is required (which is what a 'core
>> block' appears to be) then we should not allow people to live without
>> it.
> And the point is that CForms is just not required. As Peter pointed out
> many
> people can live without it (we too at the moment).
>> We need to have an answer to what "cocoon is" and what basic features it
>> provides. Having everything optional is diluting our brand and making
>> documentation and marketing harder.
> I can't see why we should abandon the option to remove easily stuff
> somebody
> does not need. The idea of documenting and delivering it with the core,
> but
> storing it in an extra block, so anybody can remove it when needed, is the
> best
> I can imagine. We still can brand Cocoon as web application framework.

First, I am in the same position as you. I will like a highly configurable
cocoon. The presented analogy to the linux kernel was very good.

What I can do only with the linux kernel?
Answer: Nothing. The kernel alone is not useful to work. We need another
packages (read cocoon blocks) to get a system useful for a user. Every
Linux distribution contains hundreds of packages and the set of packages
is what makes the OS interesting.

In the same way, I will like to have the cocoon core with only the real
basic machinery. Then the user will be able to choose the other blocks he
needs to make the work done.

Best Regards,

Antonio Gallardo.

View raw message