A couple of months agro we started a coordinated release process commencing with the release of the LogKit package following by the framework. Work has moved on to the packages under the excalibur CVS with iminent releases of the component,testcase, instrument, instrument-manager, logger, and pool packages. Work in underway for the release of serveral additional excalibur components including the lifecycle package.
Wasn't the proposal about migrating the lifecycle package into framework or did I overlook something?
you did :D
the proposal is for some cvs restructuring where we move several modules into avalon cvs, lifecycle being the first. Not into avalon-framework.jar.
=>> 2) clarify the future of cornerstone
Work has already been underten to seperate individual Corenerstone packages enabling some degreee of release control. The release process for individual corenerstone units will be undertaken following completion of the dependent excalibur packages.
Good.
search archives for "roadmap" for more ideas of the general plan. Basically following the gump dependency trail, we are.
3) stop one-man-shows
Can you be more specific - what in you view are the one-man shows that must stop?
I don't see many people working on Merlin. Is this a wrong perception?
nope. Merlin is a sandbox effort and will stay that way until lots of people (ie the entire community) have worked on it, looked at it, liked it, perhaps refactored a few times. We've talked about this, lots of people are looking at the developments. Steve's aware of all this, again, @see roadmap threads :D
Are these one-man shows related to released packages, packages scheduled for release, or are you referring to activities under the avalon-sandbox project.
I'm referring to Phoenix and Merlin. Both seem to me one-man-shows. But hopefully I'm wrong.
yep.
1) something is moving into avalon framework
2) in my view of the world, this *something* is therefore going to be considered *ROCK* solid
3) in my view of the way this project should work, *ROCK* solid is something where we have consensus and has been discussed by many more than three people.
4) a person that I technically respect highly believes that this solution is half-baked (hack is a bad term) and there are better solutions on the table.
This is enough set my 'serious avalon users' alarms off.
If any of the above is wrong, please, enlighten me.
#1 is, wrt #4, no working solutions which 'fit in' are on the table yet, but Pete definately has a point wrt interceptor architecture (it really is the "next big thing", except it is become the "current big thing" fast). #2 and #3, agreed.
cheers!
- Leo
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
