On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 9:01 AM, Luciano Resende <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:56 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Ok and thats the same as what Luciano just mentioned in another post to > this > > thread. So...if we had a way to enable/disable support for either > namespace > > independent of pulling modules in/out of the classpath would that address > > this concern and then we would be ok to merge these modules? > > > > Stepping back, what' s the problem we are trying to solve here ? I > kind like the "Don' t fix what ain't broke" phrase [1]... > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AINT > > > I think it is "broke" :) We could make the runtime simpler if we had more consistent use of fewer more functional modules and had a common understand of when things can be in packages in the one module and when things need to be in a separate module. We've consistently had users saying tuscany looks really complicate as there are so many jars and no clear way to work out what they're for and what they do, we end up with a spaghetti mess of imports exports and dependencies that few understand, even just the build and IDE development gets slower and more unwieldy as the number of modules increases. ...ant
