incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <>
Subject Re: Proposal for Lenya
Date Thu, 20 Feb 2003 16:20:51 GMT

Steven Noels wrote, On 20/02/2003 13.36:
> Michael Wechner wrote:
>> Dear Incubator List
>> Here's our proposal for _Lenya_ (plz see below), a Content Management 
>> System based on Cocoon. The proposal can also be viewed as HTML at:
> [cc'ed to cocoon-dev where Cocoon PMC lives, which will ultimatelly 
> decide whether Lenya can become a Cocoon sub-project - read 
> for background info]
> Some remarks and initial thoughts, mostly based on [BT] (belly 
> thoughts), so please don't take too serious or feel offended:
> * IMHO, the ASF as a whole has a focus on generic 'lower-level' 
> frameworks created to build a variety of applications or serve as a 
> deployment container.

What does that come from? Where does low-level and?
And if it were, it needs we need a more comprehensive CMS thing, since 
we don't have it ;-)

> I've been 'quite interested' (= understatement) in 
> CMS frameworks for a long time already, but find it a domain where _one_ 
> design doesn't necessarily fit _many_ use cases. I'm not saying the 
> meta-generic framework which will address all use cases exists (or could 
> be created), I'm just afraid the early design of Lenya might be based on 
> a set of assumptions which will be hard to reverse/refactor when fresh 
> blood comes into the project and new ideas arise. When I see 
> "disentangle cms & publications", I get worried.

Too generic a remark IMHO. Wyona has been working on that goal for some 
time now, it's not just an Apache-proposal thing. They know what they 
are talking about.

> * A sh*tload of (even Cocoon-based) (half-baked) CMS solutions exist 
> already, which might or might not be willing to join ASF in the future. 
> What will happen if Lenya (nice name BTW) comes and claims that area? 
> Will it be the reference ASF CMS tool? Can CMS be considered an area 
> where the ASF wants to operate in, like Zope (CMF) is...? Or do we stick 
> to supporting technology like servlet containers, http stacks, build 
> tools ... I know there is no policy at ASF that states only one CMS 
> project can exist under the ASF umbrella, but still there is only one 
> JetSpeed, one Tomcat, one Cocoon, etc etc - I hope my point is clear.

Errr, not to me ;-)

Cocoon can do much of Jetspeed, Turbine can do much of both, Tapestry 
now... we have loads of server frameworks that do the *same* thing with 
a different perspective. ASF wants to operate on community-driven 
opensource, mainly in the server area, so a CMS fits.

> * from what I read here [], there 
> is extensive refactoring planned _before_ reaching 1.0, yet this is 
> envisioned to be done as an incubating ASF (Cocoon sub-) project. I am 
> wondering whether it wouldn't be better if this high-impact stuff is 
> done before being moved to Apache 

The refactoring is about code... it's good that it's done here, where 
possibly new developers-viewers can drive it from here.

> * reviewing the archived commit messages, I wonder whether the proposed 
> list of initial committers reflects reality, or that the list has been 
> expanded so that we won't have the suspicion it is mainly one 
> company/group working on the codebase (as is the case with 
> right now).

Even if it was mainly one company/group working on the codebase now, 
it's not a big issue. We are here to ensure it expands. Incubation was 
created also for this reason.

> * Xopus has recently had some troubles w.r.t. its licensing policy 
> (open, not open, etc...) Are these things effectively solved right now? 

Thre will be no licensing issues. All will be donated fully to Apache.

> As I said, these are 'just remarks'. The fact I'm posting them means I 
> actually care about this proposal, in a positive sense.

Nicola Ken Barozzi         
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)

View raw message