Hi Robby & others, I'm not judging the steps that have been taken. I'm just wondering why there was such a decline in active community.
IMHO, moving to Maven, 2.2 and 3.0 make sense, but there's something missing that you need if you want to keep your userbase broad & involved: decent documentation and an acceptable learning curve ! And remember, an autopsy has a function: learn from previous mistakes. Bart On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Robby Pelssers <robby.pelss...@nxp.com>wrote: > Hi Bart, > > I'd say we've learned people are reluctant to change.. even developers. > But to be honest.. it was C2.2 forcing me to learn maven and I've been > using it ever since for all new projects. Same holds true for Spring > actually. And where I could understand the drop back then, maven or Spring > can hardly be considered to be valid reasons not to use newer versions of > Cocoon. > > I think I can agree on two things: > C2.1 and C2.2 are pretty complete in what they have to offer. They are > also pretty well documented. But most advanced users have moved to C2.2 or > C3 and can't offer good support for the older versions. I guess it's the > developers own responsibility to (NOT?) upgrade on a regular basis and > dealing with corresponding consequences of his choice. > > C3 is already used in production and in my opinion easier to use. The > biggest problem is it's still coined alpha. We should really focus on > getting c3 1.0 out which will give users a more confident feeling API's > won't break that easily. > > Robby > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bart Remmerie [mailto:remme...@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2012 9:21 PM > To: users@cocoon.apache.org > Cc: users@cocoon.apache.org > Subject: Re: Is cocoon dead ? > > Just being critical & analytical: where die we observe the big drop in > community activity ? Switch to Maven & move from 2.1.11 to next version ? > (just a guess) => What can we learn from this ? > > Bart Remmerie > > Op 11-nov.-2012 om 18:13 heeft Michael Müller < > michael.muel...@mueller-bruehl.de> het volgende geschreven: > > > Francesco, > > > > I observe this list for years now (since I started using Cocon 2.1). And > I recongnized some activities, especially from you. But since a couple of > years I'm using a) a different technology (JSF) for my web pages and b) I'm > waiting for Cocoon 3.0 to become ready. Even there are some acitivies, it > seems to be a never ending story. > > > > I guess it would be helpfull to schedule some dates for beta and > release. If it is so much to do right now, maybe this version might be > feature-reduced and some of the planned features will be postponed to a > version 3.1? Otherwise I'm afraid this project is dead - even though there > are some activities. > > > > If your horse is dead, don't try to ride it anymore. Change the horse. > > (similar to Dakota saying) > > > > Herzliche Grüße - Best Regards, > > Michael Müller > > > > Am 10.11.2012 14:00, schrieb Francesco Chicchiriccò: > >> Hi all, > >> I think e-mails like the one below are not helpful at all. > >> > >> First of all, even though most of critical aspects of our current > >> situation are reported, some things are barely wrong: > >> > >>> down the same page you find the next most recent news is a year and > >>> a half old > >> Open your favorite browser at http://cocoon.apache.org/ and read that > >> latest two news are dated July 2nd and March 3rd 2012 > >> > >>> When people ask about C2.x (and the latest released version is 2.2) > >>> nobody wants to talk about it (except others desperate for > >>> information about some aspect of C2); > >> Just browse http://cocoon.markmail.org and judge by yourself whether > >> this is true or not. > >> > >>> There are no books on anything later than 2.1, which is about a decade > old. > >> Just point again your favorite browser to > >> http://www.apache.org/dist/cocoon/ and you will see that Cocoon > >> 2.1.11 was released on Jan 14th 2008. > >> > >>> Perhaps 80% of the official documentation is either TBW or skeletal, > and the only people who know the inside of Cocoon well enough to complete > it keep asking others to do that. > >> This is absolutely false for C2.X and only partially true for C3. > >> > >> Beware, I am not stating that the Cocoon status is healthy, new > >> releases with bugfixes and new features are regularly made available > >> and documentation is accurate and complete. > >> I am only trying to look at the Cocoon project for what it is > >> *today*: a project with: > >> * very few active committers > >> * almost no occasional contributors > >> * still a lot of interested people: most because they are running an > >> ancient Cocoon version, few because they've heard of Cocoon only > >> recently > >> > >> In my opinion, a dead project is a project in which no one is > >> interested, and Cocoon is not (yet?) that far. > >> > >> Remembering that Cocoon - like as any other project at ASF - is > >> exclusively made up by volunteer contribution, I'd rather start a > >> [DISCUSS] thread to see what needs to be done and who is available to > >> help instead of such acid and unproductive e-mails. > >> > >> WDYT? > >> > >> Regards. > >> > >> On 08/11/2012 15:10, Mark H. Wood wrote: > >>> I'm not surprised at all. Looking 3cm. down the same page you find > >>> the next most recent news is a year and a half old. When people ask > >>> about C2.x (and the latest released version is 2.2) nobody wants to > >>> talk about it (except others desperate for information about some > >>> aspect of C2); one is told to use C3. C3 has been alpha for perhaps > >>> two years -- there is as yet no beta, let alone a release. There > >>> are no books on anything later than 2.1, which is about a decade old. > >>> Perhaps 80% of the official documentation is either TBW or skeletal, > >>> and the only people who know the inside of Cocoon well enough to > >>> complete it keep asking others to do that. Bugs with patches > >>> attached languish for years. Seemingly everyone using Cocoon is > >>> running a unique local version with scads of patches that are passed > >>> around like ancient lore. > >>> > >>> Why would anyone think Cocoon is dead? > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@cocoon.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@cocoon.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@cocoon.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@cocoon.apache.org > > > -- Bart Remmerie +32 (0477) 78.88.76 remme...@gmail.com
