Leo Simons wrote:
Stephen McConnell wrote:
The barrier is the policy and procedures that are put in place.
I've mentioned before (on the PMC list) that I would like to see a soft zone here in Avalon supporting and facililitating component development and experimentation.
<snip/>
My own opinion is that we need a new CVS repository - avalon-playground.
What's the difference between avalon-playground and avalon-sandbox - simple - things in playground are not destined for Avalon - its simply an infrastructure to support and enable people who want to do new things. What is the exit criteria for playground content? Its the development of the individuals who come to play.
I.e. Avalonia - the center for component developer development.
It seems you've nailed down the root of the difference in opinion -- you want all these things to happen inside the scope of avalon (and under responsibility of the Avalon PMC), whereas I think that's not a good idea.
That's not exactly what I said. Here is a consolidated statement of what I think ...
[1] I think that an Component Repository under Apache, possibly sponsored
by Avalon is much more interesting that a generic SourceForge project.[2] I think that the development of tools and technologies supporting
component repositories is totally within the scope of Avalon and that
these tools and technologies will be a fundamental in enabling manageable
repositories (see point [1]) that will ultimately be useful resources to
end users.
[3] I think Avalon or an Apache Component Repository Project could provide an
environment for COP/SOP learning and developer development (as distinct
from code development) by providing the infrastructure and policy framework
that facilitates coachingh and promotion of component and service oriented
best-practices.
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
