cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Reinhard Pötz <>
Subject Re: A new name for Corona (take 2)
Date Mon, 04 Aug 2008 13:46:47 GMT
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> Reinhard Pötz wrote:
>> I still think that we shouldn't use a descriptive name in order to not 
>> confuse our users (and ourselves).
> The more I think about it, the more I come to the conclusion that we 
> should use descriptive names :)
> The current Corona code is a collection of various modules that are 
> developed in layers. I can use the lowest layer (the pipelines) without 
> ever using the above layers (sitemap, controller etc.). So I end up with 
> using a part of Corona. This part is (small) project on its own and imho 
> calls for an own name.
> If we think further ahead, we might come to the point where we base 
> Cocoon 3.0 on Corona - and I think at this point, it's easier if we have 
> descriptive names - as a Cocoon 3.0 is just the assembly of the separate 
> parts with some additional sugar on top (ok, this might sound easier as 
> it might be in the end, but anyway).
> If you look at other projects, for instance Spring or Felix, they're 
> doing it the same way: descriptive names.

What would Spring do if the have a rewrite that _might_ become Spring 
4.0 but they don't know yet?

> Atm we have only a small set of modules in the Corona code, but perhaps 
> this might crow and the more it crows, the more difficult it will be to 
> tell people what Corona is.

Can you give an example for such descriptive names?

I like the idea of functional names but I just fail to see how this can 
work in our case :-/

Reinhard Pötz                           Managing Director, {Indoqa} GmbH

Member of the Apache Software Foundation
Apache Cocoon Committer, PMC member        

View raw message