As an Avalon client, I (non-)"vote" for Avalon 5.
For one thing, the current discussions indicate that consensus and clarity
needs to be regained on fundamental architectural issues.
As a part of moving towards Avalon 5, I'd like to see the core notions
revisited and clarified as an essential exercise towards defining the
architecture and design. Avalon 4.1 would not have that same freedom. This
should not be interpreted as throwing out the old, but it seems to me that
if the currently implemented ideas were as clear, well-defined, and agreed
upon as they ought to be, that the current discussions amongst long time
Avalon members wouldn't differ on architectural issues.
I agree that "existing containers continue to live their lives until the new
container is complete." Existing containers should also be used to
prototype the external contracts while the new internals are being readied.
--- Noel
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
