Am Montag, 18. Juni 2007 schrieb Grégory Joseph: > On Jun 15, 2007, at 15:23 , Oliver Lietz wrote: > > Am Freitag, 15. Juni 2007 schrieb Grégory Joseph: > >> Err, Oliver, I think we all agree with your comments, but they're > >> kind of out-of-scope with the subject at hand ;) > > > > I think it's in the scope of package renaming/class moving which > > should be > > done when it's time for a new major release. > > So more for 4.0 than 3.1 imho. > > > No small steps but one big refactoring. > > That will probably scare people away or make the whole upgrade > process slower.
Maybe. > By doing smaller/simpler steps, I think get more > chances to stay up-to-date. Also, there's a chance that we will > slowly identify a couple of points that we want to keep more stable, > i.e. expose as an api for external modules/projects. That's true indeed. But you have to align custom modules for every minor release with a changed api. That will propably scare module developers away. Which is even more probable when api changes are not properly documented. > Regarding the Content/NodeData naming: one of the goals is to re- > align with the JCR interfaces, and allow multiple levels of wrapping > (i.e we will have, for instance, a Content impl. that will only take > care of security and delegate to a wrapped Content, etc). The current > names are there for historical reasons, and I think if we rename > them, that will mostly depend on how they evolve. Sounds good. And a good opportunity to drop the page/website related terms. Btw, is there a reason why Magnolia is not on the JSR 283’s expert group? O. ---------------------------------------------------------------- for list details see http://documentation.magnolia.info/docs/en/editor/stayupdated.html ----------------------------------------------------------------
