Matthew Langham wrote:
No, the brand is not strong.
Look around among people that have *not* used Cocoon and ask
them what it is. Most of them will tell you "it's a
publishing engine", or even "it's a tool to perform XSL
transformations".
What we have now and what we're building is much more than
that, and IMO we won't be able to deliver this message with a
name that has been associated for 6 years to "just" a
publication engine, even if that "just" is already a lot.
Struts has Shale which is a complete rewrite that learns from
the past and looks into the future. I really think we should
to the same. We're talking a new start, aiming at building a
simple, clean and consistent platform. That deserves more
than in a major revision number of a name that denotes
something else in most people's mind.
I strongly disagree with this. And while I agree to most of the points being
discussed, I can't help but feel that is is a step too far.
And I also think the current discussion is missing something significant
(when compared to the first Cocoon steps). While only being able to quickly
read through all the discussions - if the best way is really for a clean
start:
Where is the vision?
It's being built in this thread, and I started aggregating it on
Daisy[1]. Still very embryonic, but I will spend time on it.
Now you're right: let's forget this naming issue, even if I really
consider it as being important, and concentrate on what it we want to build.
Sylvain
[1] http://cocoon.zones.apache.org/daisy/test/g1/792.html
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://bluxte.net http://www.anyware-tech.com
Apache Software Foundation Member Research & Technology Director
