On 15 Mar 2005, at 09:14, Reinhard Poetz wrote:
Where shall we draw the line between "supported" and "unsupported"? Is it really the "two committers rule" that I applied above?
Don't get me wrong, I am happy you are being pro-active about this.
However, I see several items on the "unsupported" list which are IMHO important components of Cocoon, or are blocks that I use regularly in my work. eg. chaperon, jms, naming, repository, webdav, xmldb (and others). In most cases, the fact that they do not currently have >2 supporters does not effect their quality and usefulness.
On reviewing this list again, I see several blocks that I have worked on that I probably should have put my name to, and I notice several blocks that I know people actively care about, that they have not put their name to.
Maybe I misunderstand the purpose of having "supported" and "unsupported" blocks, but I would hate to useful work being sidelined by not attracting usage or new contributions.
Another thought: maybe we should add another "state" called "sample". "tour" and "petstore" could be "sample" blocks, as well as a future block that contains all samples.
It is possible that querybean is a candidate for the sample block. My aim for it is that it will become a really simple way to plug searching into any project. Something I raised before, was that I think we will see more and more reusable "mini-apps" built with Cocoon and these may require a new classification.
regards Jeremy
--------------------------------------------------------
If email from this address is not signed
IT IS NOT FROM MEAlways check the label, folks !!!!! --------------------------------------------------------
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
