Of course. I see it as something for the medium to long term anyway. Let's get through the current crisis first. :)
Cheers, Chris 2009/6/5 Greg Brown <[email protected]> > It could potentially go there (as could the web project). The only thing > I'd want to ensure is that we didn't introduce any dependencies on other > Commons libraries (unless there were very, very strong reasons to do so). > > > On Jun 5, 2009, at 9:29 AM, Christopher Brind wrote: > > Apache Commons would be a better context for them, IMHO. But then it >> comes >> down to control ... ;-) >> >> >> 2009/6/5 Greg Brown <[email protected]> >> >> As for the 'replacement' classes, take pivot.collections - to be honest, >>> I >>> >>>> don't see what the classes in that package have to do with an RIA. >>>> Given >>>> that they are designed to compete with Java's collections classes then >>>> really they should be in their own project, e.g. Apache Commons? This >>>> would give them even more credibility as a replacement for the platform >>>> collections instead of being burried in an RIA project. >>>> >>>> >>> I agree. I think it would make sense to draw more attention to Pivot's >>> component parts: core, wtk, web, and charts. They could all potentially >>> still live under the Pivot umbrella, but exist as projects unto >>> themselves. >>> They are already structured this way in SVN, so this would be more of a >>> documentation change than anything else. >>> >>> >>> >
