Stephen McConnell wrote:
<snip>
And is not promoted as a separate "product" anymore?
Correct.
<snip>
I guess this also includes that the framework will not be developed separately anymore as a general basis for containers?
The framework api expresses part of the contract between a container and a component. The complete contract encompasses the apis, meta-info, documented semantics, etc. I.e. the framework does not live in isolation. However - any container can code provide a implementation that backing the api - but if you want a general basis you would need to look beyond just the framework and include avalon-meta into your frame of reference. If you want to consider meta-data then you should be looking into the avalon composition package. You can also leverage the avalon-activation system for runtime support.
The choices are really open.
Just getting back from vacation, and I am a bit concerned.
Avalon's main achievement up to not long ago was the framework. The framework was a separate piece for a reason. Unfortunately, it appears that Avalon Framework--the only piece that truly had full community collaboration on--is being cast aside. Was it incomplete as a full component specification? Sure, but you could count on it being stable.
Now it appears that the "Avalon" project is not Avalon, but Merlin. It appears this way in every shape. This is a major concern because if I am to be Avalon compliant, I have to be Merlin compatible without any sort of test suite. I dislike some of the libraries for reasons I won't go into at this time (they have been rehashed repeatedly ad nauseum), so the only way to do without those libraries is to provide a compatible solution--impossible without a test suite or definition of compatibility that does not include product names in it.
To me, the merging of Avalon and Merlin has now lost all traces of what is identifiably Avalon. This is not only a crying shame, but in complete disregard of its roots.
The current definition of what makes Avalon components a component is far more than just framework anymore--so you really need to make it Avalon 5.0 and get rid of deprecated cruft. Just do it, because you have already made Avalon 4.x incompatible.
I recommend still offering Avalon 4.x as a product, and redefining the current slab of products as Avalon 5. That would at least represent reality.
--
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."
- Rich Cook
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
