Il giorno 18/ott/04, alle 14:29, Vadim Gritsenko ha scritto:
And what is wrong with that approach (of just using it)? Beside community issues there were no technical issues which would force us to move people out of current component management infrastructure. Right?
Personally, I think there are technical issues as well. Developing components for the Avalon Excalibur platform is much harder that it should be. There are too many lifecycle interfaces and you're never sure which ones you should really implement and how. Having components depend on Avalon interfaces makes reuse harder. Testing is hard. Too many wheels are reinvented (think logging) but too few "enterprise" services are provided or effectively merged in the platform (transactions, for instance). Checked exceptions are the norm and therefore are widely abused.
Then there are Cocoon-specific issues, which might be a consequence of using a certain platform, or maybe not. Things like preferring inheritance over composition, which leads to long inheritance chains, and (again) abusing checked exceptions.
As we cannot depend on the Avalon community for mending some of these deficiencies, I heartily applaud Carsten's effort towards bringing that code inside, so we can at least try fixing them ourselves.
Ugo
-- Ugo Cei - http://beblogging.com/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
