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 includes SPF record at
 spf.trusted-forwarder.org)
Message-ID: <44584B70.3050008@apache.org>
Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 08:19:28 +0200
From: Reinhard Poetz <reinhard@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: [RT] Simplifying setup
References: <4455CF5C.4020300@nada.kth.se> <44562DEC.3030502@apache.org>
       <44568798.3090903@nada.kth.se>
    <74300a10330a5b0d0a8a880a.20060501154452.enycu.tbref@www.dslextreme.com>
    <44570721.6040000@apache.org> <445765E1.4060603@dslextreme.com>
    <4457A22E.6050107@apache.org> <4457A898.20502@odoko.co.uk>
 <2490a519a1ca7a2b98a.20060502140145.enycu.tbref@www.dslextreme.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <2490a519a1ca7a2b98a.20060502140145.enycu.tbref@www.dslextreme.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


I understand that you guys are frustrated that you can't use trunk in production 
or even try to migrate your existing apps. I (and I think Daniel too) feel 
frustrated because whenever we make some progress and tell the list about it, 
somebody is complaining about this or that (look at the subject of this 
thread!!!). Of course, it's everybody's right to express his thoughts and 
feelings, but this kind of reaction is not what we expect.

As being said several times Daniel and I know what's to do and we work 
continiously on it. That might be too slow for some of us (including Daniel and 
me!), but that's the best thing we can offer. Additionally I want to point out 
(again), that our work on the OSGi integration is completly _orthogonal_ to the 
thing that we call Cocoon and you don't have to dig into stuff you don't 
understand just to get something done in trunk. A couple of weeks I wrote a 
Maven plugin that extracts blocks into a Cocoon webapp, which was a first step 
into the direction to get trunk working again.

Reinhard

Ralph Goers wrote:
> Thanks, Upayavira.  Your response is better than what I would have written
> myself.
> 
> In addition, I have quite a bit of frustration that it doesn't seem (from
> my perspective) that it is all that important to those who do have the
> time to try to get a release of trunk out.  It would make it far easier
> for me to recommend moving to 2.2, and this be given the time at work, if
> a release was in sight.  As it is I expect there to be several milestone
> releases before a 2.2.0 is released.  I pushed hard for a 2.1.9 release
> primarily because my project at work is on a deadline and I needed all the
> latest portal patches.  I am currently adding enhancements to the 2.1.9
> base even though I know Carsten has already added similar functionality in
> trunk.  Believe me, I'd much rather just use those, but given the way
> things are I really don't have a choice.
> 
> Ralph
> 
> 
> Upayavira said:
> 
>>Reinhard Poetz wrote:
>>
>>>Ralph Goers wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I also get paid to do real work.  OSGi doesn't fit in those plans.  A
>>>>lot of other stuff in trunk does but I can't have it because a release
>>>>of trunk isn't going to happen in 2006.  My employer won't pay me to
>>>>work on stuff that they won't see in the next few months.  And there
>>>>is enough stuff in 2.1 that needs fixing to keep me busy for a long
>>>>time.
>>>
>>>What exactly is stopping you from working on trunk to make the release
>>>happen?
>>
>>People differ in terms of their freedom to work. Some people are
>>fortunate in that they have free time that they can contribute to
>>projects they believe in. Others aren't.
>>
>>I myself have a young family, with another on the way, which pretty
>>effectively fills my non-work time. So, the only way I can get to work
>>on projects is to persuade my boss that it is a good idea, and do it on
>>work time.
>>
>>And of course bosses tend not to favour their employees working on
>>speculative projects that _may_ give results, unless that is directly
>>related to the nature of their business.
>>
>>I personally have had the opportunity to introduce Cocoon into my
>>current workplace, but, due to the additional complexity it would have
>>brought to play, have not been able to justify it. Thus, I have not been
>>in a position to contribute to Cocoon in terms of code for quite some
>>time.
>>
>>Personally, I am grateful that you and Daniel are free to do the work
>>that you are doing. If you get a sense of frustration from Ralph,
>>perhaps you can read that as the frustration that he himself doesn't
>>have the kind of free time to give to it that you do.
>>
>>For Ralph to be able to contribute, he needs to be able to justify it.
>>If you could help him justify it, he may help sooner. Otherwise, he'll
>>just carry on waiting. Either, in the end, is just going to have to be
>>fine.
>>
>>But then, surely all of the above is obvious, no?

		
___________________________________________________________ 
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de