Giacomo Pati wrote: > > Ok, this thread had made alot of people think about it and the conclusion > is that we should not switch to a newer/better container at least until a > 2.1 release is out, right? > Yupp.
> I've allready commited the step 1 (Loggable -> LogEnabled). > Nice work! > Now I'm on step 2 (as there has not been any -1). This can be done while > we stay with ECM for now and have still backward compatability for all > custom Components somebody has around for his private projects. > > But I have some questions about this move. We have classes named after > the deprecated Interfaces (ie. CocoonComponentManger, ComposerAction). I'd > like to hear your suggestion how we should deal with those: > > 1. don't change the names > 2. rename them to appropriate names like CocoonServiceManager > 3. create new one and deprecate the old ones > > What is your oppinion? > A definit -1 for 2, because people writing custom components use ComposerAction etc. as a base class, so we can't remove them. I think 3 is the way to go: deprecate the old ones and only create new ones where appropriate. Carsten --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
