atom feed16 messages in org.apache.incubator.sling-devRe: [RT] Shall we merge microsling in...
FromSent OnAttachments
Bertrand DelacretazDec 17, 2007 1:33 am 
Carsten ZiegelerDec 17, 2007 1:54 am 
Torgeir VeimoDec 17, 2007 1:55 am 
Bertrand DelacretazDec 17, 2007 2:03 am 
Torgeir VeimoDec 17, 2007 2:14 am 
Karl PaulsDec 17, 2007 2:21 am 
Carsten ZiegelerDec 17, 2007 2:21 am 
pi...@wasabicowboy.comDec 17, 2007 8:34 am 
Felix MeschbergerDec 17, 2007 3:02 pm 
Padraic HannonDec 17, 2007 3:09 pm 
Felix MeschbergerDec 17, 2007 3:24 pm 
pi...@wasabicowboy.comDec 17, 2007 5:32 pm 
Bertrand DelacretazDec 18, 2007 5:03 am 
Bertrand DelacretazDec 18, 2007 5:07 am 
Felix MeschbergerDec 18, 2007 5:19 am 
Bertrand DelacretazDec 18, 2007 5:55 am 
Subject:Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
From:Bertrand Delacretaz (bdel@apache.org)
Date:Dec 18, 2007 5:07:18 am
List:org.apache.incubator.sling-dev

On Dec 18, 2007 2:32 AM, <pi@wasabicowboy.com> wrote:

I guess I was thinking that microsling could be viewed as a simplified sling
programming environment. ...

I agree with that, or maybe more precisely: microsling (once merged) exposes the parts of Sling that are easiest to use and understand. But those parts remain available in Sling, if they're activated.

...If so it could be viewed as just a sling bundle which provides script and
other services to get people up and running quickly...

I don't think (the merged) microsling has to be a single OSGi bundle, it will more probably be a collection of bundles, that is activated by a default configuration that's invisible to beginners.

I'll branch this thread into a "microsling 2.0 requirements" discussion now, so that we can clarify all this.

-Bertrand