On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 18:04:49 -0400, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Leo Sutic wrote: > > Merlin is a path that diverges from the path chosen by > > those of us in the "old guard" - the bunch of people > > dependent on Cocoon and other pre-Merlin architectures. > > > You want to evolve Merlin into Avalon Planet. I want a stable > > Framework 4.x. > > > + Framework 4.x moves to excalibur.apache.org. No package > > renames or class renames. > > > + You bump Framework to 5.0. > > According to Niclas, there are no anticipated changes to Framework. But if > we need to do so, we can easily branch Framework.
Framework isn't just the interfaces, it's implementations as well. There are no anticipated changes to the interfaces, but we must always anticipate changes to the implementations due to bugfixes etc. It is easy to say that we can branch framework, but there are issues to be worked out - version numbers and so on. I want to do that *now*, so that I won't have to when I really need to fix framework in some way. I have time for this discussion now, but I may not later. That is, branch now, and save later blood sweat and tears. Or, since I don't view it as branching - call it legacy support. Branching implies that AF4 will keep evolving. It probably won't. All container/component exploration appears to be in the field of constructor / bean-style injection - not in frameworks like Avalon. Excalibur (and I) will take care of 4.x. We'll support it. It has a huge installed base, and we're extremely wary of rocking the boat the slightest (read: in case of having to save the world we might call a vote). Meanwhile, you can start AF5 and do whatever you want to pursue your dreams. Keep it backwards compatible, if you want to. But you don't have to. /LS --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
