Hey Eric, still owing you a beer :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Pugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I would just suggest that the name of the container not be Excalibur..
there is enough baggage around that as is. Also, how would you
differentiate from Spring/Nano?
As this is not even a proposal, sure thing we can work on a new name. I'd
recommend that we don't spend much energy on that at first, though. We might
go on with a codename "dolphin" or something silly like that and in the end
choose a decent name.
I guess I am wondering from a marketing perspective "why is your product
better" (even if it's just ideas at this point!)?
It would be better if we sum up all problems and deficiencies that we have
faced in the past and address them in this container implementation. It
would be a consequence, and not planned up front.
Will it be the implementation based on Java 5 features?
I hope so :-)
Will it be the support for existing components?
Something to be decided. I'd say that we shouldn't worry about that.
Will it be some sort of new technique that makes setting up a container
easy/better?
Hope so too.
--
Cheers,
hammett
http://www.castleproject.org/~hammett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
