Jason van Zyl wrote:
My initial reaction is that I'd like to see Turbine stay away from
Plexus. Even if it a technically superior implementation of the
Avalon Framework,
plexus is not an "implementation of Avalon Framework", nor is any of the containers hosted @ avalon. I also don't think it smart to get into any kind of "pissing contest" over technically superior container implementations. Fact of the matter is, there is no "container spec" and hence no "container impl", just an implementation of a somewhat too vaguely described concept.
Never claimed it was 'superior'. It will certainly be different but I
never attached the 'superior' moniker to it an any point in time.
no one claimed anything, nor wants to. It's cool.

Plexus is almost specifically built for the turbine use case. Hence that use case is well-addressed. That's basically it.
No, that's not basically it. My primary use case was not the Turbine use
case. I'm assembling a runtime similiar to Phoenix, but the way Turbine
currently works is another important one I wanted to solve. Please don't
make assertion for which you have little or no supporting evidence. It's
not fair and misleading.
I'm not attempting to be unfair or misleading, sorry. I merely ment to indicate that plexus fits the turbine use case well, and that is basically why it might make sense to use it for turbine.

How long has Avalon been working to release something? There was
certainly a business motivation because you can't get squat to build
without a _great_ deal of difficulty, hardly any of the examples worked
and everyone is busy. Not just a business need, but any need.
hey, avalon has been alive and well for a long time and has released some real cool stuff! Please be careful with exaggeration ;)

Jason, I really don't want to get into an argument about all this. I am not trying to push avalon, or plexus, or the other way around. I just want to help get all the information turbine needs to decide on this stuff out on the table.

cheers,

- Leo



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

Reply via email to