On Jan 10, 2007, at 7:25 AM, ant elder wrote:
On 1/10/07, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
For example, Spring does have independently
> released subprojects, but the main Spring release is a lot more
> than just
> the their IOC container, it comes with a whole bunch of related
> components -
> spring-aop, spring-jms, spring-jpa, etc - that they deem make the
> release
> useful and interesting, and that they have tested are all at
> compatible
> levels. Also, all those components are generally only released
> together
> rather than having lots of separate independent releases. This
seems
> generally the case looking across most other projects vaguely
> similar to us.
This is a different kind of beast - it's an aggregation of released
components put together for users. Pulling this kind of thing
together takes a lot of time an resource
Maybe we've not been talking about the same thing. Do you think we
need a
beast like this? I guess I was thinking we did as it seems a bit
unfriendly
to just put a whole lot of independently released artifacts up on our
website and leave it to users to work out which work together.
"Need" such a thing - hopefully our dynamic configuration support
will be good enough that we don't "need" to do this. If we do "need"
to do this then, based on what we've been through so far, I don't
think the project will be able to grow.
Having said that, we should still make it possible for those who want
such a thing to be able to build one easily. There's an essential
difference between the production of components and the production of
distributions. More like Linux than Windows.
We might /choose/ to do such a thing, but that's a different question.
--
Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
