Danny Angus wrote:
>Jeeze, where to start.. I'd suggest you trawl our archive & bugzilla, I'll
>remember them sooner or later, but most likely later.
>I'll be sure to let you know what I do remember when it comes to me.. :-)
>
>
Actually I have already done that. A big problem I encountered was
trying to figure out "what the actual issues were" because to a large
extent I found that there was a polarization that wasn't really about
Avalon, but more to do with jar dependencies. I didn't find "clearly
defined issues" except for maybe the subject of logging - but this again
came back to jar dependencies - and the overall architecture of James -
and how the Framework is used in that architecture - and the role of
Phoenix in that architecture. Across the board I found a great deal of
confusion in respect to the usage of the word Avalon - for some people
this appears to mean the Framework, for others it appears to mean
Framework+Phoenix and for other it appears to mean Framework+Phoenix
together with components from the Avalon Apps DB package.
Personally I would like to see
(a) improvements in the framework usage
(b) cleaning up of Avalon Excalibur dependencies (the Excalibur
packages has
been cleaned up a lot and you can now limit your dependencies to only
those packages you need) - whereas the James lib includes all
Excalibur
contents
(c) elimination of structural dependencies on Phoenix (Block and
Block context
usage). This would eliminate the Phoenix jar dependency and is
relatively
easy to do. It would enable the deployment of James in more
application
scenarios (embedded, part of web-service), etc. - while
maintaining your
ability to deploy under Phoenix where appropriate.
Cheers, Steve.
>d.
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>Sent: 27 July 2002 17:41
>>To: James Developers List
>>Subject: Avalon feedback request
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Danny Angus wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>>I imagine that others on this mailing list have their own wish lists. I
>>>>recognize that this list is ambitious, which is why I'd like to see a
>>>>larger committer base. A larger base would also make it less likely
>>>>that all the committers would be absent from participation in the
>>>>discussion lists at any given time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Not really absent just busy with other things.
>>>The traditional route to becoming a commiter is to contribute
>>>
>>>
>>code/patches
>>
>>
>>>and then to be proposed and elected by the comitters.
>>>I'm sure you'd see more activity here, even from commiters, if you were
>>>instigating discussions, submitting code and improving the product.
>>>
>>>One thing James currently lacks is a clear release plan for the
>>>
>>>
>>next cycle,
>>
>>
>>>it is suffering from a number of avalon inspired deficiencies
>>>
>>>
>>and there have
>>
>>
>>>been murmurings about moving away from avalon. I believe that the head of
>>>CVS would not be as safe to use as v2.0.3 but have not had time to drive
>>>forward the changes needed, assuming they are within James not phoenix.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Hi Danny:
>>
>>Could you, and/or perhaps other people on this list, provide more
>>detail the issues you have found concerning resources from the Avalon
>>community. Are these Avalon-Framework issues, Avalon-Phoenix issues,
>>Avalon-Logkit issues, or issues related to one of the many sub-systems
>>within the Avalon-Excalibur project? Just for reference - I am a
>>committer over on Avalon and I would like to understand what the issues
>>are and ensure that constructive feedback gets back to th Avalon
>>commnity - if that's appropriate. Aside from being a committer on
>>Avalon, I am also responsible for a large number of commercial business
>>and service management components (B2B collaboration, process
>>management, etc.) and I would like to get a better picture about the
>>potential integration of James into that framework.
>>
>>Cheers, Steve.
>>
>>
>>--
>>
>>Stephen J. McConnell
>>
>>OSM SARL
>>digital products for a global economy
>>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>http://www.osm.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>
>>
><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>
--
Stephen J. McConnell
OSM SARL
digital products for a global economy
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.osm.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
