Leo Sutic wrote: > > I agree with your vision, I think, but I'd like you to > specify exactly what that vision means in terms of Avalon code: > What interfaces do we change, and how? What else needs to change, > and how? > > That said, I think we do need a bit more user-orientation and less > obsessiveness about what consitutes "good architecture" and "proper > SoC, IoC" and other fancy terms... Sometimes I think we're getting > a bit overboard and justify our architecture with statements regarding > what we consider "good architecture/philosophy etc." and not in terms of > how good and useful for our users. If this is the "less wanking" point > on Nicola's list, then I am > > +1 > > just for that reason. I think we risk building all these air castles > that no one will ever find useful irrespective of how mathematically > or academically correct they may be unless we start checking ourselves.
I will send you my mails to you personally next time, you make a wonderful job in explaining :-D Sometimes I wonder how I get to write so convoluted stuff :-/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
