Leo, > Paul, > > what you propose is what I want with one difference: > > I would like to see Cornerstone reduced.
I can't see anything that could be trimmed from there. > However, as this is not practical due to the nature of Jakarta, I'd > say we agree pretty much 100%. What you propose is also what Leo > Simons wants, I think. (If not I've just voted +1 to two incompatible > plans, oh well...) > > - Avalon Framework > - Avalon Containers (codename excalibur) > - educational (codename tweety) > - micro (codename micro) > - basic (codename fortress) > - server (codename phoenix) > - Avalon Services (codename cornerstone) > > Yep, that's the way to go. I think we all agree on the above. I know > I'm with it, anyway. > > Then there are some other items in the background: > > + Avalon Development Kit (maybe part of framework project?) Imprecise use of the term Avalon......... > + Nurture new apps (Cornerstone?) Nope. Cornerstone is for components that Phoenix dependant apps can use. None of them can run on their own. Think Xerces. > + Spec/Impl separation of framework. (?) (Details to be discussed > out...) I'm a bit hazy on exactly what this means... Separate out > interfaces into a separate Jar file or? +1, though I am not hazy. - Paul -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
