Niclas Hedhman wrote:
Farr, Aaron wrote:
Avaloners,
There has been some controversy about the status of framework documentation under the new site. I'm hoping to clarify everything in this email without starting any flame-wars.
1. Everyone, try to chill down a bit. Aaron is not trying to bring back old controversy, but is responding with a bit more heat, after Stephen's over-protection of the 'Single Avalon Platform'. There is no need to bring in the definition of "Avalon Framework 4.1 Compliance".
Let's call it over-protection against doing things that don't make sense and/or undermines the work already done in bringing together the relevant documentation into something cohesive.
2. I think we are on the brink of needing to go straight to Avalon 5 (note the missing 'framework' word), if not for any other reason than "Marketing" and "Distinctions". That will clear up any misconceptions of where the line in the sand is drawn.
I could live with that.
3. Stephen is basically saying that all the AF docs from the old site still exists, but they are at different URLs and in a different context than before.
Correct. The "framework" docs we largely made up of the "all about cop", a single page about lifecycle, and the javadoc. The conceptual stuff has been moved into Central (central/cop/*). The specification of lifecycle has been reworked from the original one page to something like 10 or 12 pages (it only semantics). The javadoc generated for the client api is the same with the single exception that the lifecycle extension api is also included in the package list.
4. Aaron is basically saying, "Can I have the http://avalon.apache.org/framework URL back and populate it with the AF4.1 documentation + any new documentation that I write and doesn't have meaning in Avalon 5 Single Platform?"
That's not my impression at all.
What Aaron has proposed is the following:
* 1. Create a section in the site dedicated to the pure and * simple Avalon framework This section may be under * "Systems" [2] or might be a product right beside Merlin * Runtime (I'm favoring product more myself). * * 2. This framework section will document a series of Avalon * framework specifications for each version of the Avalon * 4 series. This includes API docs, examples, and * discussion of various "optional" contracts which have * been included in some containers. * * 3. The latest framework specification documents will be * noted as the current and official specification. Merlin * will be the reference implementation of this * specification. If this includes major changes which are * not backwards compatible then we need to look at bumping * the version number up to 5.
In my opinion this is counterproductive because it sends the wrong message and reinforces the false notion that the framework is a product.
So, everyone, this can not be so difficult.
I am humbly suggesting that;
Whatever content existed under the /framework URL is kept without redirects, and let Aaron/Leo/whoever feel the urge to make it better.
I think its bad move. Instead Aaron/Leo/whoever could work within the existing structure and add a few "Since: X.Y" paragraphs. In addition supplementary info could be added about historical digressions.
Cheers, Steve.
--
|---------------------------------------| | Magic by Merlin | | Production by Avalon | | | | http://avalon.apache.org | |---------------------------------------|
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
