Paul wrote
1) We strive for a lowest common denominator (LCD) approach with embracing of multiple value-added implementation, which may end up divergent without that being considered a failure. Thus A-F's Java interfaces are our point of unification. There is no single container. There is no unified assembly or configuration meta info specification at the application level. XML and other.
2) We drop a unified component-level meta info dependancy and configuration design. XML and other.
The A/F is the LCD, but can slowly evolve to include such things as the dependency, configuration, assmebly and other issues. The direction of such evolution should be the result from the feedback from Merlin, Fortress, Phoenix, et al...
Niclas, we can't seem to agree on these. Some folks want all or nothing, and others want the smallest set possible. Unless there is some give and take--some compromise--then incorporating anything more than what is there already isn't going to happen. I mean that from a practical observation.
--
"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]
