On Sunday 31 October 2004 21:26, Adam Jack wrote: > Whatever the case, long and the short is that we didn't seem to build on a > simple use case, we didn't use it first and code it second. Basically it > stagnated underneath us. I don't think I'll ever quite understand why, but > despite technical merits (IMHO) something just didn't spark others. Maybe > marketing, maybe star alignment, definitely community.
I think you are close to the target when you say; "Didn't use it." Since we have constantly refined the equivalent that started as Avalon Repository (and now is at www.dpml.net as Transit), some of the parts that are intersecting with Depot becomes very generic. In fact, we can now artifact enable any application with changing the app(!). I.e. add a Jar to the classpath and set a single system property and you use Maven remote artifacts and local caching. No API, no code changes, 'just use it'... That is IMHO, real value. OTOH, this effort will stabilze fairly soon, and that is something that ASF doesn't like. Perfect apps that has no evolutionary path are doomed in this setting, so perhaps even Depot didn't have any long term prospect within ASF, due to the same principle. Cheers Niclas -- +------//-------------------+ / http://www.bali.ac / / http://niclas.hedhman.org / +------//-------------------+
