I think someone wanted this to get forwarded to the Avalon 'general' mailing
list, but since that doesn't exist, I thought I'd send it to our dev list. 

For the Avaloners:

There's been a bit of discussion lately on [EMAIL PROTECTED] about what to do with
Hivemind seeing that it has started to outgrow its current location in
commons-sandbox.  Some have suggested that it fits better over here in Avalon
(as a sub-project) than in Jakarta.  In some respects, I agree.  I think its a
little light to be its own top-level project ( and if you
look at the jakarta charters vs avalon charters, Hivemind falls more on the
Avalon side of things.  Not sure what Howards thoughts are on that.

--- Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Howard wrote:
> > 3) Chuck it over to Avalon
> > I've looked to see how we could graft HiveMind into Avalon and vice-versa,
> > but they are really quite different beasts.  The type-1 > vs. type-2/type-3
> > split is intrinsic and difficult to reconcile.  HiveMind's concept of a
> > module doesn't map so easily into the  Avalon space, and HiveMind's
> > free-for-all approach doesn't jive with Avalon's dogmatic security model
> > (including its explicit application construction descriptor).
> I didn't mean to suggest that you should try to move avalon architecture
> towards hivemind or vice versa,
> but I did wonder if there would be support @avalon for an alternative
> approach as an avalon sub-project.
> The danger of having an Avalon alternative @jakarta is that it will be seen
> by people as somehow being Jakarta's favoured solution, rather than as one
> of two (or more) alternatives promoted by Avalon.
> If you see what I mean.
> Of course you went through this whole debate when we discussed whether we
> needed Tapestry as an alternative to Struts, as equal members of Jakarta
> neither approach can be seen to be in any way an "endorsed" or
> "favourite". The same (IMO) would not be true for service frameworks if
> Hivemind was a Jakarta project not an Avalon one. Hivemind would be seen by
> some to be Jakarta's favoured solution.
> FWIW I'm certainly not going to oppose this, Hivemind seems to be a well
> thought out proposal, but I don't want Jakarta to be accused of trying to
> replace Avalon, and I guess that will mean involving Avalon folks in the
> discussion.
> Imagine the reaction there would be if I proposed a "make" utility as a
> Jakarta sub-project, and perhaps you'll get the thrust of my concern.
> d.

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  jaaron      <>

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to