My Message, Clarified ---------------------
digressing a little...
For anyone wondering whether I'm mad or agitated; don't worry. I just come on strong to set something straight ASAP :D. But I've seen avalon suffer from these kind of "change for the sake of change" things before (we did silly things like slap @deprecated on Component a few times to often :D).
Eliminating the Component interface changed Avalon from being a closed solution to a solution open to the rest of the world.
I meant just the '@deprecated'. That was the bad part of the idea. Just like the bad part of the idea here is again saying things are silly, bad, or deprecated.
Examples of silly:
1. writing a book on "101 reasons why ROLE is a good thing" 2. writing the sequel "101 reasons why ROLE was a good thing"
Example of bad:
1. writing documentation that reference ROLE instead of clearly
showing that a interface class name is being passed as an
argument
2. writing a new component and including ROLE because all the
other components include ROLE or because you copied the
example from Avalon docsCheers, Stephen.
--
|------------------------------------------------| | Magic by Merlin | | Production by Avalon | | | | http://avalon.apache.org/merlin | | http://dpml.net/merlin/distributions/latest | |------------------------------------------------|
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
