The main building blocks (DataChannelFilter and lifecycle annotations) are already in the core. The rest of it is still evolving, so I just feel more comfortable to assign it an "extension" status at this point (maybe implying it can go away, or is supported differently than the core). In the future we may decide to move it to the core.
Andrus On Jan 27, 2011, at 12:53 AM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote: > On 27/01/11 2:35 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote: >> So I am suggestion to move cayenne-mixin to the main development tree from >> sandbox (under the name "cayenne-lifecycle") and include it in 3.1 releases >> as a separate jar. This will allow our users to get the "official" builds of >> cayenne-lifecycle, and hopefully won't create release scheduling conflicts >> between the core and lifecycle. > > The concepts appear to be extremely useful, but I'm not understanding why > they don't just go into the core jar. Is it because they still need extra > work? Or do they interfere with the existing lifecycle events in some way? > > Ari > > > -- > --------------------------> > Aristedes Maniatis > GPG fingerprint CBFB 84B4 738D 4E87 5E5C 5EFA EF6A 7D2E 3E49 102A
