cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <>
Subject Re: [RT] a simple release plan
Date Thu, 16 Mar 2006 14:50:46 GMT

Peter Hunsberger wrote:
> On 3/16/06, Upayavira <> wrote:
> <snip/>
>> Thus, we have 'one way' of doing it, that people don't want to follow,
>> for their own reasons, and because of this, nothing at all happens, and
>> our community gets weaker by the day.
> Oh, come on. There's no real evidence for this being true.  If it is
> happening it is only because people start to spread FUD instead of
> putting some energy into actually trying to work with trunk....
I think this thread is the evidence.  I've lost confidence that anything 
beyond 2.1.x will ever get delivered.  I hear lots of promises but they 
don't seem to get fulfilled.
>> We need to have the scope for differences, alternative approaches,
>> conflicts, etc, and then switch to the best when a best clearly shows
>> itself. What we have now is one unimplemented ideal that we are
>> supposedly working towards (I'm talking of the community here, not you
>> yourself). And that ideal is for some psychological reason preventing
>> others from engaging with their own ideas. It is that psychological
>> block that I want to find ways to remove. Really, what the technology is
>> that helps to remove that block, I do not care. I just want to see that
>> block removed so that the creativity of the many can flow again.
> Once more I ask: what is that you want to do that you can't currently do?
Run a full Cocoon in trunk (i.e. get a sample site up that looks and 
behaves pretty much the same as the 2.1 branch. Not just 2 or 3 blocks I 
don't use.
>> Carsten has offered a suggestion that _he_ is prepared to implement. I
>> would like to hear other proposals from people of things that _they_ are
>> prepared to implement. Only that way will we move beyond this impass.
> Daniel and Bertrand have already given you a reasonable proposal.
> Carsten's proposal sounds reasonable on the surface, but the fact is,
> that it will actually take a lot of focus away from the current trunk.
>  For years people have been saying they need real blocks, now all of a
> sudden, there is a need to split a new fork so that a Spring based
> container can get released?  I don't get it: sure it will help some
> people, so will real blocks.  It seems to me that if the same energy
> was spent getting the current trunk cleaned up that would go into a
> 2.3 release  this discussion)  then the job would be done.
While real blocks seem appealing there is no evidence yet that they will 
work well; logistically, performance wise, etc. So putting all our eggs 
in that basket is risky. And frankly, full Mavenization would provide me 
with 90% of what I want in the way of a build process. Unfortunately, 
from what I can tell that work is nowhere near complete.  But besides 
this, trunk contains a large number of new features, from allowing 
non-poolable Transformers, Generators, etc., to a new portal internal 
architecture, to a Spring core, external configuration parameters and 
more.  All Carsten is proposing is a way to get those features out the 
door in the next few months.  Now, if the proper way to do that is to 
create a 2.3 branch and leave trunk alone I'd be fine with that, except 
that I still am not going to touch trunk until I can build and run it all.

Your suggestion that the time and energy be focused on trunk instead 
isn't realistic or true.  Very few people understand how to make that 
happen or seem to want to participate in that.  Remember, this is a 
do-ocracy. The fact that it hasn't happened should give you an idea of 
how well that idea will work.
> Here's an analogy for you: a man gets engaged to a woman he has loved
> for many years.  A week before the wedding his buddies take him out
> for a bachelor party and he falls in lust with a young "dancer" who
> flirts with him (and happens to take a lot of money from his buddies
> without him really noticing).  Should he break off his engagement with
> his fiance to start chasing the young dancer?
Nice analogy. It has nothing to do with the current situation.
> --
> Peter Hunsberger

View raw message