cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gianugo Rabellino <>
Subject Re: [RT] The next shiny thing?
Date Mon, 05 Dec 2005 09:12:31 GMT
On 12/5/05, David Crossley <> wrote:
> Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
> > Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
> >
> > > It is so easy to ditch other peoples work, isn't it?
> >
> > Oh, come on Daniel, you're taking this personally.
> I reckon that Daniel has hit on many important issues
> related to community-building. If people are not careful
> then we are going to lose many of our current developers.

Which is what, more or less, is happening today, albeit at a slow
pace. Just look at the commits or try to find common patterns in the
evolutionary discussion: what you will see is a really small bunch of
people talking and coding, whereas this community used to have long
threads and fast paces. Daniel is right, when you talk APIs people get
bored: you could look at it from an ivory tower and  label that as
childish attitude and , or you can do something to change that and
address the real issue which, to me, is lack of people that are
confident enough to talk about internals because, basically, they
don't feel they belong. C3 is, to me, a step forward in that

> > I strongly respect
> > and admire what you've been doing to push Cocoon 2.2 forward, but you
> > also have to realize how hard it would be for you to carry the burden
> > of being the main responsible for such a core part of Cocoon without a
> > real committment from the community, which I'm not really seeing at
> > the moment. You should realize how the biggest feeling floating around
> > the Cocoon community is that we want to do something to make Cocoon
> > fly and soar high in the skies, instead than strive to survive its own
> > complexity.
> Cocoon would have already been soaring if we had
> polished the system and documented as we went.

Symptoms, again. Then why on earth the system isn't polished? Lazy
butts or nearly-to-impossible work? Cocoon 2.2 is cleaner, but it
won't refrain people from telling me how their project could benefit
from  some Cocoon features, but since the beast is so complex, they're
just looking elsewhere or implement in-house Cocoon clones. Cocoon,
today, is a terrific tool if you have complex needs (simplifying hard
stuff) but it falls short to address the medium to simple stuff, which
is where the real beef, community wise, is.

> We would have retained many of the new people
> that we had attracted. I get the feeling that our
> discussions are going to frighten the hell out of
> our existing community. We have not yet solidified
> our current offering and now are racing on to the
> next new thing. So why should they trust us to not
> repeat that behaviour. We are in danger of being seen
> as a research project.

I'm surprised to hear from you what to me looks like sweeping problems
under the rug because they'd scare people away: to me, what's really
going on is a bunch of children shouting that the Emperor is naked,
what I'd actually expect from the community I want to belong to is
understanding how we are able to identify what the real issues are,
and address them accordingly.

Mind you, having some strong business interests in terms of existing
projects with Cocoon 2, I shouldn't really be this much shouting about
moving on in possibly incompatible ways: if I've been repeating from
months now that we need a 3.0 (remember AC EU?), this is because I
think that without a clear step forward, all we can do are small steps
solving our self-induced problems while the world is clearly moving to
different solutions and scenarios. The Cocoon community has never been
a (late) follower as we risk of being now: if shaking the tree helps
regaining momentum, then I'm all for an open discussion about it.

Gianugo Rabellino
Pro-netics s.r.l. -
Orixo, the XML business alliance:
(blogging at

View raw message