> -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Just thinking ..... is there any reason why we don't simply stick > with "Cornerstone" and the cornerstone package name? This would > lead to just more focus on what we have as opposed to changing > things around. Excalibur for our utility code; Cornerstone as the > avalon component suite; and Avalon is the framework and > containment solution.
Sounds fine to me. I just wanted to confirm this to be the case. So cornerstone for actual components. Excalibur for utilities. > > > >Perhaps we should have a set of guidelines for component writers? > > > > I agree. A wiki page has been reserved, I'll add something later today: http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?action=edit&id=AvalonComponentW riterGuidelines jaaron --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
