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.
Looking at the code - it looks like a component to me in that there is nothing to say that it is not a component.
Would do you think of moving this to e-lifecycle-impl?
My preference would be to move it to a package under avalon-components. I could set it up if you like (have more than a couple of things to take care of there anyway so it would not be a problem).
Cheers, 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]
