Stephen McConnell wrote:
> 
> Carsten:
> 
> A lifecycle extension dealing with an alternative 
> configuration model should not go under Fortress - instead it 
> should be located somewhere like excalibur-configuration or 
> perhaps more appropriate .. 
> avalon-components.
> 
> What's your opinion?
> 
Actually, I honestly don't know where things fit best in the
whole bunch of Avalon repositories and subprojects. 
The extension is very simple and has no dependency to any
other part of Avalon, so from that POV it can be placed nearly
everywhere.
I agree that the use is much wider than Fortress, so it could
be placed outside of Fortress. 
But moving it to excalibur-configuration creates a new unwanted
dependency between e-c and e-lifecycle.
Avalon-components is imho only for components and this a
not a component. 
Would do you think of moving this to e-lifecycle-impl?

Carsten


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to