46 messages in org.apache.cocoon.devRe: Renaming Corona to Cocoon 3.0 and...
FromSent OnAttachments
Reinhard PötzAug 6, 2008 4:19 am 
Felix KnechtAug 6, 2008 4:28 am 
Andrew SavoryAug 6, 2008 4:30 am 
Daniel FagerstromAug 6, 2008 4:39 am 
Thorsten ScherlerAug 6, 2008 4:54 am 
Carsten ZiegelerAug 6, 2008 4:56 am 
Jasha JoachimsthalAug 6, 2008 6:15 am 
Peter HunsbergerAug 6, 2008 7:30 am 
Ralph GoersAug 6, 2008 7:43 am 
Joerg HeinickeAug 6, 2008 8:09 am 
Vadim GritsenkoAug 7, 2008 5:23 am 
Bertrand DelacretazAug 8, 2008 7:06 am 
Alfred NathanielAug 8, 2008 4:23 pm 
Reinhard PötzAug 10, 2008 1:15 am 
Reinhard PötzAug 10, 2008 1:19 am 
Vadim GritsenkoAug 10, 2008 12:08 pm 
Reinhard PötzAug 10, 2008 1:18 pm 
Vadim GritsenkoAug 10, 2008 3:46 pm 
Reinhard PötzAug 16, 2008 7:19 am 
Ralph GoersAug 16, 2008 7:32 am 
Grzegorz KossakowskiAug 17, 2008 7:44 am 
Reinhard PötzAug 17, 2008 8:14 am 
Sylvain WallezAug 17, 2008 10:41 am 
Grzegorz KossakowskiAug 18, 2008 2:23 am 
Rainer PruyAug 18, 2008 2:43 am 
Grzegorz KossakowskiAug 18, 2008 3:04 am 
Jeremy QuinnAug 18, 2008 3:42 am 
Jeremy QuinnAug 18, 2008 4:07 am 
Reinhard PötzAug 18, 2008 4:21 am 
Sylvain WallezAug 18, 2008 5:12 am 
Sylvain WallezAug 18, 2008 5:13 am 
Sylvain WallezAug 18, 2008 5:47 am 
Grzegorz KossakowskiAug 18, 2008 6:22 am 
Reinhard PötzAug 18, 2008 6:23 am 
Grzegorz KossakowskiAug 18, 2008 6:28 am 
Reinhard PötzAug 18, 2008 6:29 am 
Sylvain WallezAug 18, 2008 8:04 am 
Ralph GoersAug 18, 2008 8:21 am 
Carsten ZiegelerAug 18, 2008 8:41 am 
Jeremy QuinnAug 18, 2008 8:56 am 
Sylvain WallezAug 18, 2008 8:57 am 
Grzegorz KossakowskiAug 19, 2008 4:53 am 
Jeremy QuinnAug 19, 2008 8:03 am 
Jeremy QuinnAug 19, 2008 8:10 am 
Reinhard PötzAug 20, 2008 5:44 am 
Peter HunsbergerAug 20, 2008 7:32 am 
Actions with this message:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Atom feed for this thread
Paste this URL into your reader:
Subject:Re: Renaming Corona to Cocoon 3.0 and infrastructureActions...
From:Reinhard Pötz (rein@apache.org)
Date:Aug 18, 2008 4:21:39 am
List:org.apache.cocoon.dev

Sylvain Wallez wrote:

Reinhard Pötz wrote:

Versioning

------------------------------- For Cocoon 2 there have been proposals that all odd versions are development/alpha versions and all even versions are stable releases.

I like this idea and propose that we follow this versioning schema in Cocoon 3: All 3.0.x releases are marked as development versions and we clearly explain this on the website and the READMEs of all artifacts.

When we believe that the community and the technology are stable, we do a 3.1.0 release.

I think this is less confusing than appending alpha, beta or milestone postfixes.

I would say the contrary. Let's not forget that most of our users aren't hard-core developers (they love Cocoon because they can do complex stuff without programming) and they aren't used to this odd/even versioning scheme that comes from the Linux kernel.

Rather than that, it seems to me that most of the "normal" (i.e. non hard-core hacker) people consider a version without any "beta", "milestone" or other suffix as an official stable release. A well-known example is Firefox that goes through a series of milestones, beta and RC version before releasing a stable version with the same number. Eclipse does the same.

I don't have a strong opinion on this, except that I don't think that the term milestone doesn't fit very well for us because this would imply that we have like e.g. Eclipse a well-defined roadmap. And as we all know, that's simply not the case.

I'm also fine with 3.0-alpha-1, etc. and, see the reasons below, it's probably better to change the proposal into this direction.

Also, I haven't voted for the renaming Corona to Cocoon 3.0 as I was on vacation, but I really think this is too early. Cocoon 2.2 is just out and we announce a 3.0. This will most probably lead people to consider 2.2 as a transition to 3.0 and just not use it, and thus just look elsewhere. Stated clearly, I have fears that just as Maven almost killed the developer community for 2.2, announcing a 3.0 now will kill the user community.

We had three possible routes for Corona:

1) Develop Corona outside of the Cocoon project (e.g. Google, Sourceforge, etc.) 2) Find some alternative name and release it under this codename. 3) Release it as Cocoon 3.0-alpha-x

1) would have been really dangerous IMO. What would people have thought if the former PMC chair created an alternative project that is a reimplementation of Cocoon outside of the oversight of the Cocoon PMC. And that just a few months after his resignation.

2) Many people advised not to invent another codename. Also the name finding game wasn't really successful. Personally I'm not willing to invest any more time into this.

3) Releasing 3.0 comes with the risk that 3.0 never takes off and doesn't attract a broader developer and user community. But as long as we only release alpha software, we can even do a re-rewrite.

Regarding your "too early announced" argument, I'm not so pessimistic. Most people very well understand the difference between production quality and alpha software and that alpha software is no guarantee for anything (time, quality/stability, community). Addtionally we will add warnings to all download pages, READMEs and also adding "alpha" helps.

Also other projects demonstrate that having an alpha branch doesn't make most people wait for the final release of the alpha branch (see Tomcat, Jetty, Maven, httpd, etc.). And if you have time to wait, I don't think that you really have to solve a problem.

Additionally we have taken care that Cocoon 2.2 can be run in parallel with Cocoon 3.0 in the same web application and they can event communicate via the Servlet-Service framework with each other.

-- Reinhard Pötz Managing Director, {Indoqa} GmbH http://www.indoqa.com/en/people/reinhard.poetz/

Member of the Apache Software Foundation Apache Cocoon Committer, PMC member rein@apache.org

________________________________________________________________________