cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carsten Ziegeler <>
Subject Re: [RT] OSGi based blocks
Date Wed, 15 Mar 2006 15:04:13 GMT
Upayavira wrote:
> Ralph Goers wrote:
>> Please Daniel, don't take this personally as it isn't really directed at
>> you.  Part of it is directed at myself as I haven't had any significant
>> amount of time to contribute to this work. I guess I'm just wondering if
>> I'm the only one who is feeling this way? If so, I'll stop my whining.
> I'd like to look at why you don't have time to contribute. I believe it
> is because this 'Cocoon' that is under development is still in early
> stages and still quite 'abstract' in the problems it is trying to solve.
> That's not a bad thing necessarily, but the consequence is that it feels
> as if there's no space for people to innovate on smaller or more
> immediate issues because we're all waiting for this 'big thing'.
> If the OSGi blocks stuff is so orthogonal to Cocoon, why don't we:
>  * break it off into a separate development path, no longer consider it
>    'trunk',
>  * move 2.1.X into trunk
>  * Start innovating on 2.1.x again
>  * Wrap the OSGi blocks system around this new trunk as and when it is
>    a bit better developed.
> Personally, the long waiting for this blocks system is having very
> unfortunate effects on our community. We need to change that. Take the
> development of blocks off the front stage, and let it happen quietly
> somewhere until there's something clear for us to see and play with,
> rather than preventing people from being able to innovate because they
> can't understand the status of trunk and don't have time/resources to
> invest in working it out and keeping up.
> That means that all that are left are those of us that have 'personal
> spare time'. The rest of us, who do all of our Cocoon work as a part of
> our livelihoods, can't find time to contribute to Cocoon because we
> can't justify it - it is just too hard to work out where to contribute.
> And 'just waiting' is dangerous, as each moment some of our valuable
> resource wanders away.
I personally would love to have the new configuration features of 2.2 in
like the includes for xconf and properties. This alone is a big step
forward. Unfortunately this is tight to many other changes like the
Spring based container (which I also would like to have *today*).

So perhaps your suggestion, starting anew with 2.1.x as trunk is a good
way to move on.


Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG

View raw message