> BTW - I also re-read the main docs again and a whole bunch of
> references to
> "server" have popped in again ... which I thought I deleted a
> while back ;)
I actually removed a lot of those (not all) during my sweep
through the docs. Sure you actually committed those changes?
> Im curious why they were re-added in. My view is that most of
> Avalon is not
> server-specific - the framework is a Component Framework (not a server
> Framework) and is aimed at general component based programming rather
> rather than server specific etc. Would anyone mind if I reverted some of
> that?
Not at all...
> As for what to do next - I would like to do the framework
> javadocs. I would
> prefer it if someone else was to write a basic how-to for the framework
> section ;)
I will tackle that _if_ I can find the time (I wrote half of it
when my comp crashed, last time).
> I will also try to correct any inconsistencies in the existing
> high-level design orientated docs.
lifecycle.xml still refers to Executable and Interruptable -
should be an easy fix. Other than that, Excalibur really needs
documentation badly.
cheers!
LSD
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
