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".
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.
+1. What is currently discussed as Avalon 4.x is more than that. During the 4.x series the definition of Avalon has always been the framework. By declaring what is now in Avalon as Avalon 5 you have
much more freedom to design Avalon the way you want.
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.
That's not good. URLs are very important, and apparently all the old URLs have been broken.
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?"
I would be +1 on that as well.
--
"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]
