> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Geir Magnusson Jr.
> Sent: Friday, 23 March 2001 3:20 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: New Subprojects
>
>
> Peter Donald wrote:
> > > Jon Stevens :
> > > >For #2: It certainly could start in the Commons.
> >
> > No it couldn't from what I understand. Commons won't allow
> imports directly
> > from turbine/avalon and to try to do such a complex system generic from
> > start may be a bit of a PITA at this stage. Especially when both
> > turbine/avalon already offer a lot of support.
>
> Why wouldn't the import be allowed? That's one of the reasons for
> commons : to provide a place to collaborate across projects...
>
I guess it would depend on their level of coupling, wouldn't it. It is the
difference between a framework and a collection of common utility classes.
When you import framework classes, often it seems to be viral. To use that
one class you end up importing quite a few other supporting classes. That is
what makes the Commons a difficult project, there is often a natural desire
to make it into a framework. The alternative may be a lot of "insulating"
interfaces to allow the components to be plugged into a system without the
supporting framework.
Conor
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
