> ls jakarta-avalon-excalibur > ls jakarta-commons > ls jakarta-commons-sandbox > > Eek! Look at all those suspiciously similar packages. io, cli, store, > utils, configuration, database conn pool, threading, logging. I don't > think we Excalibur developers should claim the moral high ground on the > code duplication issue ;P
the sole reason we still have excalibur and cornerstone is that the commons project will not accept avalon-enabled components. I'd be happy if they would, we'd just migrate everything over to commons, make all of avalon committers to commons, then start work on integrating (taking the best pieces of the various implementations and "avalonabling" all of it). The way I see it, Avalon Framework should be in very widespread use across the Jakarta and XML projects. The way we capture complex design issues in a small, solid framework is not found in any of the other projects. Commons doesn't see it that way and feels any component that uses the avalon framework interfaces as having an ugly dependency on some external project. This is a shame. I will keep claiming that moral high ground tho! ;) cheers, - Leo -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
