I would answer a strong "yes" to question 5, but would rather leave question 6 to those of you who have a vested interest in Avalon. Whether or not the Avalon community decides to focus its efforts on a single container or not, I believe it will be important to maintain a strong, explicit separation between the layers of your architecture. [POSA] describes the Layers pattern and the "Relaxed Layered System" variant; I am advocating the former. From what I know of this community, the historical separation of "framework" and "container" should be maintained in both software and community. I believe that building a specification that is independent of its implementation in a container is valuable.
I realize I may be entering the discussion late, so I will leave it at that unless others would like to discuss it further.
-- Ryan Hoegg ISIS Networks http://www.isisnetworks.net/
[POSA] Buschmann, Meunier, Rohnert, Sommerlad, and Stal. Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture. Wiley, 2000.
Jan Schröter wrote:
5. Should there be a formal framework specification?
As Avalon would only maintain one container, such a test suite is not necessary. It would help only in the creation of many containers which would split users and developers alike into different small, competing groups. Futhermore it would waste a lot time that could be spent on standard components, container improvements, bugfixing etc.
6. If so, what should it consist of?No answer because answer to 5. is a big NO.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
