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: local policy)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623)
In-Reply-To: <43961144.90709@odoko.co.uk>
References: <43961144.90709@odoko.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed
Message-Id: <f793a9f9fadd273fcbf2d085e1530cff@wrinkledog.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Mark Lundquist <ml@wrinkledog.com>
Subject: Re: An entirely new beast
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 14:42:58 -0800
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org


On Dec 6, 2005, at 2:31 PM, Upayavira wrote:

> This, it is _not_ Cocoon 3.0. It is something else.
>
> Thus, I agree with Sylvain that it should have a new name, but think
> that Raccoon is a bad one, as it is a play on Cocoon and could never
> really be the project's real name. Imagine it, "powered by Apache=20
> Cocoon
> Raccoon". Hmm.
>
> So, what I'd propose is we choose another name, and consider it to be =
a
> new subproject of Cocoon. A "new, exciting web development framework
> from the people that brought you Apache Cocoon".
>
> And, the existing Cocoon carries on as long as people want and need =
it.
> Maybe 3.0 could still be the OSGi version. It may well still bring =
huge
> benefits to those using the current generation of Cocoon.
>
> Thoughts?

If "it" is truly "something else", then I agree, it should have a new=20
name.

If, as someone has suggested, "it" should turn out no longer to be=20
Java-based, then it would definitely be "something else", of course. =20
If it's still Java, then I can't tell yet (but maybe others can).  If=20
it's like the difference between Cocoon 1 and Cocoon 2, then I think it=20=

should still be "Cocoon".

my $.02... :-)
=97ml=97