On Wed, 2005-09-21 at 19:48 -0400, John Casey wrote: > Marmalade will still be available as a mojo language, we just won't be > supporting it from this project...and maintenance of this integration > will happen on a very different timescale. > > So, I'm putting this up for a vote. I'll leave it open for 72 hours (not > that I think we need it), and reassess then. In this case, abstention > signals assent. If you don't veto, I'll simply remove it.
+1 Marmalade has utility in its own right, but I think what we wanted it for was a way to bridge people into being able to use Ant and not necessarily Jelly. You yourself are working to make Ant utilities work in m2 so I would have to agree with you in your assessment of Marmalade. -- jvz. Jason van Zyl jason at maven.org http://maven.apache.org People develop abstractions by generalizing from concrete examples. Every attempt to determine the correct abstraction on paper without actually developing a running system is doomed to failure. No one is that smart. A framework is a resuable design, so you develop it by looking at the things it is supposed to be a design of. The more examples you look at, the more general your framework will be. -- Ralph Johnson & Don Roberts, Patterns for Evolving Frameworks --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
