On Thursday 06 November 2003 09:15, Stephen McConnell wrote: > Another proposal > ---------------- > > No need for another shakeup. Instead, we continue the stready > improvement and development of the Avalon content, migrating stuff to > commons when appropriate, improving quality of existing components when > appropriate, keeping links to other activities active and alive. And at > the same time - build the tools supporting component and service > management that facilite component based development and enable > automated component validation, discovery, deployment, execution and > management.
This is not exclusive of Leo's well-intended push for getting a component repository going. In fact, his proposal will partly be part of the use-cases for such tools. Also, an interesting aspect of Leo's proposal is that 1. It could facilitate differentiated quality levels, without shoveling around from sandbox to some more permanent location, as is often the case in Apache land. 2. Avalonia wouldn't have to have the requirement of not linking to LGPL code and other similar licenses. In fact, Avalonia _could_ allow individual licenses for individual components. 3. The "low entry" barrier is a plus. People like me don't necessary gets/wants Apache committer access, as it, as you pointed out, comes both with rights and _responsibilities_. Avalonia could be much more laxed, to allow more codebases to enter. As for the "single contract", I think that is a great notion, but people do work in a hetereogenous environment _now_, not in an ideal homogeneous environment in the future. So let's just accept that, and say; "Hey, I want to share this great component, but it only works under Phoenix. If you want to use it under Fortress, you got to help out." And once the "standard contract" is in place, I could announce; "Available NOW, works with all containers." As for Copyright Assignment; I think that it is just easiest to let each component author to maintain copyright with the following catch; 1. The contact email must be present in source code. 2. A blurb saying that if the email is no longer valid, the code belongs to public domain. 3. Contributors add themselves to the list of copyright holders for each file they modify. Leo, I think your intention is all well and good. And although Stephen, the sleep deprivated super-human, thinks otherwise, I think you would have a more active community around component development, than can be achieved around container development. And let's face it; A container without components are useless. Meanwhile Steve, we carry on all the container and tool goals at Avalon, and keep us synchronized with Avalonia, and have a set of use-cases. Niclas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
