forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject Re: [RT] A new Forrest implementation?
Date Tue, 15 Aug 2006 10:50:07 GMT
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> El lun, 14-08-2006 a las 20:59 +0100, Ross Gardler escribió:
>>This is a Random Thought. The ideas contained within are not fully
>>developed and are bound to have lots of holes. The idea is to promote
>>healthy discussion, so please, everyone, dive in and discuss.
> Just some quick remarks. 
> Is our focus on framework or on implementation for the new trunk?

I'm not sure I understand you question, I'll take a stab at it though...

I see the possible new branch being a complete implementation of Forrest 
as it currently stands (i.e. with a CLI, with in place editing and with 
a WAR distribution). This would be built on a new framework that 
replaces Cocoon.

>>The Drawbacks
>>What are the drawbacks of getting rid of Cocoon?
>>Probably the biggest drawback would be that we have to code it. There's
>>not a huge amount of work to be done, but there are some neat things in
>>Cocoon that we would have to reimplement or find elsewhere. We may be
>>able to extract some of the code from Cocoon, but I'm not convinced this
>>is a good approach.
>>Because of this need to write the code it will mean that Forrest would
>>initially take a step backwards in terms of its functionality.
> The other thing is that the existing community is right now pretty much
> cocoon orientate. Dropping cocoon in 2.x can have the side effect that
> the current community *may* loose interest in forrest (cocoon have been
> a big selling point in the past). 
> The critical question is, how many people (as devs) can we attract to
> join the rewrite dropping cocoon, taking a step back in functionality,
> focusing on java for new components?
> How many committer and devs will work on branch, how many on trunk, how
> many on both?
> I hope to see a healthy discussion, which will give some leads regarding
> above questions. 

This is very important, thanks for highlighting it.

I'd like to ask how many developers here do anything other than write 
XML and XSLT in Forrest?

How many actually use Forrest in an environemnt where it is doing 
anything more than building a website?

I'd suggest that the thing to do is ensure that we support the building 
of simple websites quickly in order to quickly support what I suspect is 
the vast majority of our users.


View raw message