forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <>
Subject Re: Forrest: dynamic or static?
Date Mon, 22 Sep 2003 07:49:40 GMT
Jeff Turner wrote:
> Being a Cocoon distribution, there is a huge amount of stuff that Forrest
> *could* include.  I think we need to draw a line, define what Forrest
> actually is, and stick to that.

May I disagree?
IMO limiting the scope too much does not bring benefits.

> The line I propose is that Forrest should be regarded as an offline site
> generation tool that happens to have an online mode for rapid page
> development.  There should be no features _unusable_ from a static site.
> For especially useful features, like searching, we can bend the rule and
> have online/offline equivalents (lucene and google).

Let me bend this a bit.

Forrest should be targetted *mainly* as an offline feneration tool, 
making it possible to use almost all features even without a live Cocoon 

But this doesn't mean that we should in any way forget about those that 
use it live and not cater for them in any way.

> I can demonstrate why I take such a hardline stance with a small
> benchmark:
> 1.2s per request (excluding warmup) is pathetic.  By comparison, Apache
> takes 2 MILLISECONDS to serve the same page:
> Perhaps we're doing something stupid in our sitemap.  Perhaps Cocoon
> caching is crap.  Whatever the cause, we're stuck with the result.  I
> consider online Forrest to be too slow for anything other than
> development work.

For now, it surely is. Never say never.

> So I'd like to narrow Forrest's potential scope to *just* those features
> that can be expressed in HTML.  We get the best of Cocoon (sitemap
> expressivity) while leaving out the worst (performance, overhead).  This
> means Forrest will never evolve into some ultimate CMS, but there's
> enough of those in the world already.

Lenya is a CMS, and there is no need to reinvent it. You have deleted 
the pathetic editor attempts I had put in CVS, and I did not say 
anything about it, because I agree that Forrest must remain focused.

So +1 to keep an eye to "static" and "Apache-friendly" Forrest.
-1 to crippling its ability to do the same in "live" mode, as that's how 
most intranets use it.

Nicola Ken Barozzi         
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)

View raw message