At 01:20 1/3/01 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Avalons framework (via configuration methods usually). I much prefer to fix
>> "fix" avalon than to create a new project to replace Avalon.
>
>I understand that. And I would agree - if library's goal would be only to
>create components.
>
>But for few people it isn't - the components is just a mean to get to the
>goals.
>
>Please understand I'm not arguing against "fixing" Avalon - and I'm sure
>the library will give you an excelent oportunity to do that, and
>componentize what is to be componentized.
>
>Again: my goal is a project where existing projects can cooperate. And in
>order to succeed we need a neutral project. Avalon is far from that.
>
>As you said earlier, components will be a by-product - as projects share
>code and it is componentized, some of it will reach the "product" level we
>want for components.
>
>All your arguments would be right if the library would try only to create
>components, but this is not the case - and it took us a lot of effort to
>find a common point and proposals where all our goals can be met.
I agree with the aims but maybe I should structure my objections
differently ;)
Lets assume for the moment that Jakarta-Forge has been built. It includes
CJAN/bug-tracking/testing/gumping/gian-java-tree/alexandira/whatever. Each
project can choose which components to share. For instance I look for to
the Digester package from struts being packaged separately.
The question arises where is that component? Is that component still in
struts but is "published" to JakartaForge? Personally I would +1 that
because it leaves it in the hands of those most capable of maintaining it.
Overtime it may reach such a high status that it is promoted to have
separate mailing lists etc. Other projects can declare a dependency on
digester.jar and gump will automatically detect when incompatible changes
are made. Eventually it may become a top level jakarta project if there
becomes a need. Lets call this "The Gathering" as CJAN components are
gathered from projects. If we adopt this approach then I don't see any need
for any project besides the infrastructure one ;)
What I believe you are advocating is creating a new CVS to which this
component is added (ie moved out of struts into another CVS). This new CVS
could also act as a breeding ground for new components??? It is this aspect
that I believe should be within Avalon. Creation and sharing of components
was one of the things Avalon was setup to do (admittedly it failed but
...8]).
I am not sure why you believe that Avalon would not be neutral. I believe
the majority of the committers would be happy to help develope JavaBean
style components etc. I have no problem components not conforming to the
Avalon-Framework (as long as they are in another CVS) and I believe the
others would agree.
You may say my concerns are not real or I am splitting hairs ;) In the long
run if all goes well then I say we do split it off into it's own project
(or even own domain - ala jpan.apache.org). However at the moment there is
too much overlap with Avalon. I agree that the charter of Avalon should be
reduced (in time) and library-dev should take over some of it.
For the moment how about developing under Avalon and as soon as it is
obvious that the project can stand on it's own two feet and its goals are
being met (ie framework agnostic). It is split off to form it's own project
and Avalons charter is amended. Not to be a nay-sayer but I have been
involved in many projects that have tried to do the similar (kinda my
thing) and it wasn't until I cam across ant and avalon that I saw it
working. (I assume it also happens in taglibs but I don't use jsp).
Most projects that attempt this work for a little while until people
realize how "boring"/"difficult" working on infrastructure can be. At that
point it tends to stagnate. I really don't want to see another one of these
projects happen ;) Especially when it could be me who ends up having to
support any orphaned components ;)
Cheers,
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 |
*-----------------------------------------------------*
