Berin Loritsch wrote:
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Extensions became intrinsic to the component deployment model when we voted for the release of the excalibur-extension package (a vote that received your +1). At that point we said to everyone out there that there is a notion of lifecycle stage extensions in Avalon. We documented in that release the support for that abstraction in both Merlin and Fortress. There are simply no issues to solve - this is simply a matter of getting back to a process of collaboration.
I don't buy that reasoning. Lifecycle extensions (as released) are a set of interfaces. Those interfaces work. Currently Fortress and Merlin have two different ways of addressing how to work with them. I don't think you have been listening to the points I have been raising either.
Could you please take a moment to detail any problems you see concerning stage management. I have (on at least two occuations) offered to assist you on this subjet and remain willing to help you out on this. Perhaps we can nail down you technical concerns once and for all.
Here they are (mostly related to growing the API):
* First, when growing an API we need to get everyone on board so that they understand what that API is doing.
* Second, we need a way for users to be able to play with the new functionality without being lulled into thinking everyone is on board with it. While the Avalon namespace does imply that, IMO is should only be used for pure Avalon components.
* Third, I believe that we should embrace a multi-namespace world (we will have to for management extensions). This could lay the foundation for container extensions which in turn would encourage users to embrace tags not specified in the Avalon namespace. Esp. when it doesn't matter what container they use, they can still keep the same functionality.
* Fourth, in my mind the stage/extension stuff is a risk due to the general lack of knowledge with it. While I do want to understand it, that takes time, and I would rather have a release of Meta-info now so we can start integrating the libraries.
* Lastly, we need to manage user expectation. I have a project that will be using the lifecycle extensions, so it is of great interest to me. It will also help me to understand what I do and don't like about the way it is now. Until such a time, I really don't feel comfortable signing off on them being in the Avalon namespace.
Please see my response to the other email so that you can see a few further arguments.
Please understand that I am not ignoring your oppinions at all, but I am trying to get you to recognize the value in my oppinions.
--
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
