I like that :) Avalon PI ----- Original Message ----- From: "Berin Loritsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Avalon Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 8:04 AM Subject: Re: [proposal] IoC type 3.14 extension to the Avalon Framework
> Jonathan Hawkes wrote: > > > Did you even read the rest of the message? I'm not pushing a type 3 > > replacement. You could continue to write components as you wish. Please > > see the original message and do me the courtesy of reading it. I'm not > > trying to spark an argument over which way is best. > > > > Which is why the "IoC type Who Cares" RT would be best. It allows enterprsing > folks to try something new, while still working with the tried and true. > > Since I like names better than numbers (I couldn't tell you what the difference > is between IoC type 1, type 2, or type 3 simply from its identifier), I guess > you could call your proposal Avalon PI. > > Also, if we have an infrastructure that is flexible enough, it would allow > us to play around for Avalon 5 and see what feels the best. No need for > arguing the pros and cons--we just do it, and it works. Of course, we might > argue that the simplified container architecture is Avalon 5.... > > Until we have an infrastructure that is flexible enough, we really can't start > to look at Avalon 5 though. > > -- > > "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] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
