> From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> * moving out of core means death to the idea of reliable deployment
> across containers
I think your social observations are spot-on, and your technical
assessment is correct. The absence of the tag in the avalon
namespace makes it optional, and thus people will ignore it.
The absence also makes it impossible to guarantee that a component
will run in any Avalon container.
But I think your summary is way off.
It is not the death of cross-container deployment. We will get
there. Is it the death of Fortress/Merlin-style extensions? Maybe.
I don't think the current extension model should go into the
core, because I don't think it satisfies all needs. Peter Donald
explained some difficulties with it - mostly it didn't support
interceptors, which I have tried, used and found very helpful
since then.
> * an absence of an extension mechanism in @avalon core makes the
> proposal technically invalid
I don't understand this.
All the proposal says is this:
Put the extension stuff into @lifecycle, not @avalon, because,
well, we just don't know whether this type of extensions will
be the final version.
In what way is the proposal invalid?
/LS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
