Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Berin Loritsch wrote:
Leo Simons wrote:
Hi peeps,
I just committed lots of new files to fortress. I've moved fortress
to a new package, org.apache.avalon.fortress, and also moved around
lots of other things, basically like proposed and discussed before.
Could y'all please check it out and tell me if you're okay with it?
If so, I'll update the examples and remove the old materials.
thanks!
cheers,
Now how would that affect the fact that we are trying to do Avalon
Container with codenames? The first release being codename Fortress?
As we switch codenames, we should not have our users change the
package that they use.
I was thinking the same thing ;-)
But looking at current implementations, I don't think they will be able
to use Merlin2 as a drop-in replacement to Fortress... or will they?
Are Fortress' APIs gonna become our standard container APIs?
Container APIs are changing as we can detect the needs.
Right now, ECM is being replaced and the developer is divorced from the
need to take care of all the nitty gritty details of setting up the
ResourceManager, the LogManager, etc.
The end user also has significant runtime improvements.
In the Merlin release, things will change again, but the users will
have something sensible in the meantime.
In the next release there is more that the developer does not
necessarily have to deal with. The good parts of Fortress are kept.
Now, the end developer contracts are fairly simple with Fortress,
and the internal contracts can change dramatically.
Keep in mind with each release we provide a step-wise improvement
towards the best container. After the Merlin release, we need to
focus on a container/embedder contract and making it modular without
being too complex.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
