forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <>
Subject [Proposal] use Cocoon-2.1
Date Sat, 23 Aug 2008 07:59:06 GMT
For a long time Forrest has been stuck with an old version
of Cocoon trunk (i.e. the early days of Cocoon-2.2).

See issue FOR-1017 and the linked discussion.

The options were:

0) Ensure that the last known working Cocoon can actually be used: FOR-1015

This current state was documented and some extra
instructions were added to $FORREST_HOME/etc/cocoon_upgrade/

Of course this is not suitable because we cannot
keep up with any Cocoon developments, nor can we
readily fix issues in Cocoon.

1) Use the current Cocoon trunk release via Ivy: FOR-1016

This is still a possibility, but not sufficient progress.

2) Use the head of Cocoon 2.1 branch: FOR-955

Some progress was made on that option a couple
of years ago. Recently Thorsten and David have
made excellent progress. See more below.

3) Continue the "forrest2" solution.

This is still a possibility, but not sufficient progress.


This proposal is to go with Option 2, i.e. use Cocoon-2.1 branch.

This will not preclude doing either Option 1 or
Option 3 (or some other) at a later stage.

Please see our progress in the new branch, i.e.
svn co
and do the usual FORREST_HOME and PATH setup.
It should be working now, i.e. there is no need to
do anything that was mentioned in FOR-955.

We have tested it on a new forrest seed in
'forrest run' mode for both skins and dispatcher.
Also in 'forrest site' mode. Also the Forrest docs
in $FORREST_HOME/site-author seems okay.

Not tried it yet in 'forrest war' mode, but expect to
strike the issue about plugins in FOR-1093.
Careful, it might appear to work, but the targets/webapp.xml
"war" target needs to be modified to use WEB-INF/cocoon.xconf
and then it will fail.

Please do more testing and also on your own projects.

Please raise any concerns that you might have about
going down this route.

After discussion settles and it seems that we have
reached consensus, then we will probably hold a vote
to confirm it.


View raw message