On Thu, 9 Jan 2003, Stephen Haberman wrote:

> Is anyone using Fulcrum HEAD? I can tell the Avalonization has/was
> started, what with FulcrumContainer and what not, but is anyone
> using it in an Avalon environment (or non-Avalon)? Or is it in a
> suspended state?

I will be moving SourceCast to the new Avalonized Fulcrum code at the end of
February.  Any service implementations which haven't yet been ported which 
are used by SourceCast (e.g. XML-RPC) I will port at that time.
 
> Basically I'm wondering if I could investigate refactoring things a
> bit to be more elegant. E.g. get rid of the old singleton TurbineXxx
> classes that just had wrapper methods around the class, move stuff
> over to the Avalon lifecycles/configuration, and then get rid of the
> rest of the cruft.

I'd also be a fan of seeing the TurbineXxx classes go.  I'm +1 on 
deprecating them today and removing them in a while.  I'm unsure about the 
interface classes -- I suppose that those should probably stay.

The non-Avalon interface to the old-style Fulcrum core which John McNally 
was able to preserve should also stay in the mainline for some time to come.  
I wouldn't be adverse to seeing a branch which dumps that stuff entirely (as 
per Duncan's "Rules for Revolutionaries"), but I think that Jason van Zyl 
has already done a good deal of that work with his own Avalon container 
(Plexus?).
 
> I see there is a PRE_AVALON tag...is that enough or are there enough
> people needing the old Turbinized Fulcrum that a branch is
> warranted?

I believe that tag exists for those wanting to get at the last 
state of the source code pre-Avalon.  I don't think that it's a branch tag, 
and personally don't yet need such a branch.  The only reason I could see 
myself needing one is for later maintainence.  However, the fact that 
Fulcrum doesn't have much in the way of release tags makes this tricky 
indeed; it's likely I'll never use such a branch.
 
> Oh, and I'd also like, as a part of this, refactor the stratum cruft
> out of o.a.torque.Torque and have it be an Avalon component just
> like the rest of the Fulcrum stuff. Should be easy, both in
> Torque/Fulcrum and then the relevant changes to Turbine-2.2/2.3.

Woo hoo!!  Go Stephen!


- Dan



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

Reply via email to