forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Christian Grobmeier" <>
Subject Re: Piwi - Forrest in PHP
Date Mon, 22 Dec 2008 16:50:35 GMT
thank you very much for this interesting and long answer. I really
learned a lot of it, esspecially the difference between Web Framework
and Publishing Framework in the case of Cocoon and Forrest.

> This would be requirements creep for Forrest. We are a content framework not
> a web framework. Given that the goal of Forrest is to provide many output
> formats from many input formats (and according to the PIWI website this goal
> is shared) then I am struggling with the above affirmation.

Now that I understand your goals fully for the first time, I also
understand my faults in the past with forrest. I have to rewrite the
goals of PIWI actually. I now consider PIWI a webframework. PIWI shall
integrate several projects in a smooth way and shall provide many
output formats from many input formats (as forrest does) too.

We wrote the PIWI-Crawler in another svn folder. Means the PIWICrawler
is totally seperated from the PIWI-Core. I may consider this more a
publishing tool now.

> Either you don't need to support forms, or you need to support them in a way
> that is compatible with the goal of the project, i.e. give the best possible
> rendering of a page given the constraints of the output format.

Yes. We want to support forms as a web feature and the issue how to
work with them when static content is beeing generated is still open
and unresolved.

> Exactly, see my comments above. I feel that either the PIWI objectives are
> poorly stated on your website or you have a sever case of requirements creep
> on your hands.

Guilty in the case of poorly stated. I have to state out that PIWI is
a web framework. And there is an existing tool called PIWI-Crawler
which has publishing tool features.

> Historically Cocoon...
>... but Cocoon is most definitely a web framework.

Thanks for that - I fully understand now.

> Given the history of Forrest I doubt we would be interested in a project
> that brings back the requirements creep that resulted in the creation of
> Forrest in the first place.

After reading your mail, i understand that you would say this is a
step backwards :-)

> a) decide what the scope of PIWI is and, if necessary address the
> requirements creep issue
> b) allow Forrest plugins to be reused without modification (a script for
> conversion might work)
> Even then I'm not saying you will get traction, I'm only saying I doubt you
> will get traction without that.

I see. Well, since we actually want have this features you consider
requirement creep, I think that PIWI actually doesn't fit perfectly to
Forrest. Allowing Forrest Plugins to work would be horror to implement
in PIWI I guess. Even a conversion script will be heavy work. I think
this has to be developed in Java, not PHP.

>> I see some synergies in PIWI and Forrest. For example, I always wanted
>> to use Forrest but had no java host ready.
> But this shows the misunderstanding you have of Forrest. The idea is that
> you host static content, not dynamic content. If you need dynamic content
> you need a web framework not a publishing tool. To host static content you
> don't need Java (or PHP)

Yes. Thanks that statement enlightened me.

> Sure, and your work has gone further than my Forrest 2 experiments did.
> However, it has diverged from the goals of Forrest and is therefore, in its
> current form, a very different project.

Totally true. Sadly - I really was excited about bringing some benefit
to forrest. Instead of that, I should better visit Cocoons
mailinglist. However, I learned much and would like to thank you for
your explainations. I will not bother this list again with my ideas of
contributing PIWI as a sub project of Apache Forrest - I may find a
Champion in a more appropriate project :-)

Merry christmas + and good new year,

View raw message