I think you worry too much.
probably :D. It is better to worry up front than complain in retrospect!
There would be no use of the word Pico in the codebase of exCornerstone.
ah, I renamed half of my bad example to ***Bean already:
ConnectionManagerBean extends DefaultConnectionManager
{
public ConnectionManagerBean( /* ... stuff goes here ... */ )
{
super();
/** ... stuff goes here ... */
}
}there would be the need for an added constructor in either an existing class or a new class, right? And that constructor would need to be changed whenever a dependency is added, right?
I don't think you need to worry about Avalon users using the constructor directly.
my thought was about people that use neither pico nor avalon but just need a reusable bean. One of the good things about pico is that you're also making that a real possibility, innit?
Pico users will have to just accept that there might be changes.
that's a bit of a policy change for how we currently try to do things :D. Not saying that's neccessarily a bad thing here.
anyways, no -1 here, but no +1 yet either.
gotta run!
- LSD
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
