cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Upayavira ...@odoko.co.uk>
Subject Reviving 2.1 development (was Re: [RT] OSGi based blocks)
Date Wed, 15 Mar 2006 15:38:23 GMT
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> Upayavira wrote:
>> Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>>
>>> Le 15 mars 06 à 16:04, Carsten Ziegeler a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>> ...I personally would love to have the new configuration features of
>>>> 2.2 in
>>>> 2.1.x,
>>>> 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...
>>>
>>> How about backporting the Spring-based container and the new
>>> configuration features to 2.1.x, and make that Cocoon 2.3, without
>>> touching the current trunk?
>>>
>>> The current 2.2 would then stay as is, people could work on it until it
>>> stabilizes, and when it's time to release it we can always call it 3.0
>>> or whatever to avoid confusion.
>>>
>>> And that 2.3 release would be a big improvement already, especially
>>> using Spring as its container.
>>
>>
>> Exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about. Both streams keep
>> innovating.
> 
> I have no problem with a backport in general, but why exactly *now* when
> Daniel writes a mail that he has solved all problems that required a lot
> of research work and Daniel and I only need some more weeks of
> "implementation work"?

Consider it nothing more than a build up of frustration. I will only
fully believe it when you say "now" rather than "some more weeks". I
offer you both/all my greatest encouragement in what you are doing - I
really do hope it is a few weeks - I find it very exciting. But at the
same time, I want to see something move in the rest of Cocoon too.

Regards, Upayavira

Mime
View raw message