Berin Loritsch wrote:
>
>Version 5 should include the following:
>
>* Clean room implementation--no deprecated methods/classes
>
+1
>
>* Unified CM/SM (i.e. the interface above)
>
+1 on retraction of remove()
Not convinced on the topic concerning changes to the exception model.
>
>* Simplified package name
> - org.apache.avalon.**** ?
> - org.apache.framework.**** ?
>
+1 on a different package name to prevent collisions with 4.9.
>
>* Container abstraction
> - Meta data info
>
+1 on meta-data info in framework.
Somewhere between 0 and -1 on formalization of container in framework
(more discussion on that is needed). My own view is that a container is
implementation and I don't see a requirement for anything structural at
the framework level - as distinct for convinience tools, utilities and
default implementations in Excalibur.
>
> - Possible interface to have DefaultComponentManager defer all
> lookups to the Container
>
Don't like the sound of this bacause it will force the introduction of a
container defintion into the framework and I don't thing that's a good
thing to be doing.
>
>* Standard for Version info,
>
+1 assuming we are talking about for formal usage and association of the
org.apache.avalon.framework.Version class with a component.
>and how we plan on handling that.
>
on another thread.
>
>How does this sound to everyone?
>
So far so good.
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
OSM SARL
digital products for a global economy
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.osm.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
