cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sylvain Wallez <sylv...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Renaming Corona to Cocoon 3.0 and infrastructure
Date Mon, 18 Aug 2008 12:12:32 GMT
Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:
> Sylvain Wallez pisze:
>>
>> I would say the contrary. Let's not forget that most of our users 
>> aren't hard-core developers (they love Cocoon because they can do 
>> complex stuff without programming) and they aren't used to this 
>> odd/even versioning scheme that comes from the Linux kernel.
>>
>> Rather than that, it seems to me that most of the "normal" (i.e. non 
>> hard-core hacker) people consider a version without any "beta", 
>> "milestone" or other suffix as an official stable release. A 
>> well-known example is Firefox that goes through a series of 
>> milestones, beta and RC version before releasing a stable version 
>> with the same number. Eclipse does the same.
>
> Yes, that makes sense. I also wonder how beta, RC, etc. releases can 
> be more confusing that odd/even versioning.
>
>> Also, I haven't voted for the renaming Corona to Cocoon 3.0 as I was 
>> on vacation, but I really think this is too early. Cocoon 2.2 is just 
>> out and we announce a 3.0. This will most probably lead people to 
>> consider 2.2 as a transition to 3.0 and just not use it, and thus 
>> just look elsewhere. 
>
> Provided that one documents our thoughts on 2.2 and 3.0 clearly I 
> don't think there will be that much of confusion.
>
> Actually, I think it's a high time for us to define official document 
> that explains our rules for giving artifacts version numbers. WDYT?
>
>> Stated clearly, I have fears that just as Maven almost killed the 
>> developer community for 2.2, announcing a 3.0 now will kill the user 
>> community.
>
> Sylvain, pardon my ignorance but what kind of real problems with Maven 
> we have _now_ in Cocoon's trunk? I can understand that people were fed 
> up with Maven at the beginning of the transition because it was almost 
> impossible to build Cocoon. But that was more than one year ago.

I can't say what problems there are _now_ since I don't build Cocoon 
anymore. Hopefully it works now, and I was referring to the past: when 
the move to Maven was started, the 2.2 build was mostly broken for 
months, which drained an incredible amount of energy away from the 
project, either because people got discouraged by this broken build 
(e.g. me), or because they invested their volunteer time in 
understanding Maven (e.g. Jorg Heymans) rather than developing Cocoon.

I'm glad it seems to work now, but the amount of energy needed to setup 
and maintain this build system (remember, it's _just_ a build system) 
has been astronomical.

> When it comes to user community, I would say that it grows quite 
> nicely. There are people contributing[1][2] some tutorials, sharing 
> their experience and seem to have a real fun with 2.2.

It's very nice to see people using 2.2, but I have the impression that 
most of the 2.2-related questions are related to maven-isms, artifacts, 
poms, etc. Without wanting to sound harsh, I'm wondering whether this 
community has learned to live over time with some sort of chronic 
disease, and is so used to it now that it doesn't even realize that life 
could be easier without it.

Note that I said "could" and not "would" since ultimately the 
people-that-do decide what they prefer. And yes I'm a retired old-timer 
here, but I still care for this community where I learned so much.

Sylvain

-- 
Sylvain Wallez - http://bluxte.net


Mime
View raw message