Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 8059 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2005 03:37:52 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 13 Dec 2005 03:37:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 4077 invoked by uid 500); 13 Dec 2005 03:37:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 4046 invoked by uid 500); 13 Dec 2005 03:37:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 4035 invoked by uid 99); 13 Dec 2005 03:37:49 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Dec 2005 19:37:49 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [130.237.222.115] (HELO smtp.nada.kth.se) (130.237.222.115) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Dec 2005 19:37:49 -0800 X-Authentication-Info: The sender was authenticated as danielf using PLAIN at smtp.nada.kth.se Received: from [172.16.248.242] ([216.9.46.68]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.nada.kth.se (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id jBD3bPVs028588 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 04:37:27 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <439E41F6.1060606@nada.kth.se> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 19:37:26 -0800 From: Daniel Fagerstrom User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) X-Accept-Language: sv, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Subject: Re: Roadmap for 2.2 [was Re: [RT] Ditching the environment abstraction] References: <439DF661.5010608@apache.org> <439E024F.5070204@nada.kth.se> <7557e99f0512121810g11933318i7e7d7b2fffda1dae@mail.gmail.com> <439E3CD5.6090907@d-haven.org> In-Reply-To: <439E3CD5.6090907@d-haven.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Berin Loritsch skrev: > Gianugo Rabellino wrote: > >> On 12/13/05, Daniel Fagerstrom wrote: >> >> >>> I agree that the main focus must be to get a 2.2 release. So the >>> question is what to do with the real blocks. They are currently rather >>> close to the "specification", but we don't know if the specification is >>> good enough without getting experience from the blocks. >>> >>> For ditching the environment abstraction, that should of course not >>> block any releases. It can always be solved by making the change in a >>> branch and merge it back when it works. >>> >> >> >> I tend to disagree. The environment abstraction is to me part of the >> underlying public contracts users rely upon: changing contracts >> between minor versions is borderline but acceptable given the >> cost/benefit ratio, but it's out of question between revision. Having >> 2.2 with the old environment and, say, 2.2.1 with a new one seems like >> breaking our versioning guidelines to me. I'd suggest we ditch it >> altogether while we still have time. >> >> Ciao, >> >> > > Just make sure it doesn't break anyone accidentally. No risk, we will break peoples code intentionally ;) More seriously, it was an RT, I wanted to hear what people think and if there was any problems that I hadn't thought about. I will of course cast a vote before commiting anything. We could possibly provide some optional back compability mode that puts the environment abstraction objects in the object model. But I would suppose most users would be happy to get rid of this extra complication. /Daniel