On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Peter Donald wrote:
>
> When you say Avalon - what are you referring to exactly? If you are
> referring to the frameowork components or cornerstone components then I
> agree - if not then you are going to have to explain it further ;)
> Cheers,
>
I think this is the core issue that we are having problem resolving here.
Avalon is not clearly defined enough for us to make this judgement from
outside, and the sources of information ( the website vs. the emails
posted by yourself describing Avalon ) are sufficiently different to cause
even more confusion. I think we are very close to reaching a consensus on
what the Commons project and the Library/Agora/Catlog services within that
project consist of, and the goals of the project. And to be brief ( while
also beating the poor dead horse yet again ), Avalon has an existing
product for which it is known for, an existing set of developers who
developed that product with specific design goals and methods, and an
existing userbase that is using that product ( James is based upon Avalon
if I understand correctly ). Instead of trying to cram the
ideas/goals/objectives identified on this list into an existing project,
why don't we move forward and create a set of services and infrastructure
without destroying what Avalon has already done or is trying to do.
David
> Pete
>
> *-----------------------------------------------------*
> | "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
> | and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
> | everyone gets busy on the proof." |
> | - John Kenneth Galbraith |
> *-----------------------------------------------------*
>
>
