Steven Noels wrote, On 20/02/2003 13.36:
What does that come from? Where does low-level and?Michael Wechner wrote:Dear Incubator List
Here's our proposal for _Lenya_ (plz see below), a Content Management System based on Cocoon. The proposal can also be viewed as HTML at:
[cc'ed to cocoon-dev where Cocoon PMC lives, which will ultimatelly decide whether Lenya can become a Cocoon sub-project - read http://www.wyona.org/lenya.html for background info]
Some remarks and initial thoughts, mostly based on [BT] (belly thoughts), so please don't take too serious or feel offended:
* IMHO, the ASF as a whole has a focus on generic 'lower-level' frameworks created to build a variety of applications or serve as a deployment container.
And if it were, it needs we need a more comprehensive CMS thing, since we don't have it ;-)
I've been 'quite interested' (= understatement) in CMS frameworks for a long time already, but find it a domain where _one_ design doesn't necessarily fit _many_ use cases. I'm not saying the meta-generic framework which will address all use cases exists (or could be created), I'm just afraid the early design of Lenya might be based on a set of assumptions which will be hard to reverse/refactor when fresh blood comes into the project and new ideas arise. When I see "disentangle cms & publications", I get worried.Too generic a remark IMHO. Wyona has been working on that goal for some time now, it's not just an Apache-proposal thing. They know what they are talking about.
* A sh*tload of (even Cocoon-based) (half-baked) CMS solutions exist already, which might or might not be willing to join ASF in the future. What will happen if Lenya (nice name BTW) comes and claims that area? Will it be the reference ASF CMS tool? Can CMS be considered an area where the ASF wants to operate in, like Zope (CMF) is...? Or do we stick to supporting technology like servlet containers, http stacks, build tools ... I know there is no policy at ASF that states only one CMS project can exist under the ASF umbrella, but still there is only one JetSpeed, one Tomcat, one Cocoon, etc etc - I hope my point is clear.Errr, not to me ;-)
Cocoon can do much of Jetspeed, Turbine can do much of both, Tapestry now... we have loads of server frameworks that do the *same* thing with a different perspective. ASF wants to operate on community-driven opensource, mainly in the server area, so a CMS fits.
* from what I read here [http://www.wyona.org/roadmap.html#1.0], there is extensive refactoring planned _before_ reaching 1.0, yet this is envisioned to be done as an incubating ASF (Cocoon sub-) project. I am wondering whether it wouldn't be better if this high-impact stuff is done before being moved to ApacheThe refactoring is about code... it's good that it's done here, where possibly new developers-viewers can drive it from here.
* reviewing the archived commit messages, I wonder whether the proposed list of initial committers reflects reality, or that the list has been expanded so that we won't have the suspicion it is mainly one company/group working on the codebase (as is the case with xreporter.cocoondev.org right now).Even if it was mainly one company/group working on the codebase now, it's not a big issue. We are here to ensure it expands. Incubation was created also for this reason.
* Xopus has recently had some troubles w.r.t. its licensing policy (open, not open, etc...) Are these things effectively solved right now?
Thre will be no licensing issues. All will be donated fully to Apache.
As I said, these are 'just remarks'. The fact I'm posting them means I actually care about this proposal, in a positive sense.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
