Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of joerg.heinicke@gmx.de designates
 213.165.64.20 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <43934D7F.5080700@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 21:11:43 +0100
From: Joerg Heinicke <joerg.heinicke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: [RT][long] Cocoon 3.0: the necessary mutation
References: <43908B84.7070909@apache.org> <439124F7.9090806@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <439124F7.9090806@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 03.12.2005 05:54, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:

> I'm still in the "we don't need OSGi"
> camp (as some of us are here), as I still believe that it adds to much
> complexity. But as others (who I trust) believe in this and as I don't
> have time to work on this, the only way to progress is to not block
> those who have time to do something. But I come more and more to the
> conclusion that we simply should use Spring as the base framework and
> build some class loading stuff on top of it (which we already have with
> the sitemap classloaders). That would be a simple but sufficient solution.

I second this. We talk about learning less technologies and introduce 
different technologies for the container and the applications - or is 
anybody really considering to build an application based on OSGi while 
this is much more probable for Spring?

J�rg