On 24/3/03 3:09 pm, "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anyway, we can't force people to do anything: if they won't migrate from 2.0, we have failed and we should start reconsidering our architectural strategies because our user base is not following us.
Hmm.. I don't think you're right on this, Stefano... Look at HTTPd, still a lot of people are using 1.3, when 2.0 is delivering (for example) _A_LOT_ more performance than the old tree...
Still, a huge part of the user base didn't "switch" just yet...
key words: 'just yet'.
I didn't say "how long". AFAIK, many people are still using Cocoon 1.8.2 in production and it's been running for two years without failing once.
Yet, everybody considers Cocoon 1.x dead and no development is taking place anymore and nobody objects it.
Cocoon 2.0.x will remain there potentially for years and will be used for many more in production environments.
Still, if development doesn't move on and transition isn't smooth, we are actually forking the project.
If development on HTTPD continues on both fronts, they failed since the community shows that 2.0 is nothing better than what they already had.
i don't think this is the case, I think it's just a matter of time.
As it will be for Cocoon 2.1.
if a project creates a new generation and their development base splits, they are, in fact, forking the project.
See Tomcat.
This is the *worst* thing that can happen to an open source project. Luckily, Apache is very tollerant at forced cohabitation and eventually, split development bases remerge down the road.
Stefano.
