ant elder wrote:
On 3/12/07, Jim Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mar 12, 2007, at 5:11 AM, Simon Nash wrote:
> I think this is a direction worth exploring. As Jim says, we need to
> develop these thoughts in more detail to understand the benefits of
> making these changes.
Just to be sure, I didn't say it was worth exploring. I'm just trying
to understand what is being proposed as it is not clear at all.
> A useful way of doing this would be to look
> at some use cases and see how the current design handles these, and
> what would be different with a restructured/modularized/componentized
> kernel.
>
My advice would be to take the approach of focusing on how your
proposals benefit the community and, in particular, the areas people
are currently working on.
Lets remember we are all part of the community and all the area's
currently
being worked on includes all the things in the sca-java-integration
branch.
It looks like Sebastien has started prototyping these changes now,
thats in
the sca-java-integration branch, i guess it doesn't matter where its done
right now but I really hope as soon as anything comes of this we start
moving bits to trunk to be refined further there as it would be vastly
better for Tuscany if we could find a way to get things back together
again.
Yes, I'm really hoping that this componentization work will help get
things back together, smaller modules will help.
I'm +1 in principle to whats being proposed and I'd like to help with the
prototyping work.
...ant
Cool! I see that you've posted another email to discuss specific help
(see
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-tuscany-dev/200703.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]).
I'll respond to this one.
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
