On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 03:42, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > Hi everyone. > > This mail is directed to EVERY USER of Merlin, if you just starting out, half > way ahead and experienced, _please_ read and respond. > > == Abstract == > Avalon has yet again been under fire for making too much changes to the Avalon > Legacy (read Framework, site and documentation), what constitutes compatible > changes and how these changes are perceived by the Avalon-dependees, such as > Excalibur, Cocoon, James and Loom. The aftermath of this last storm, makes > _me_ believe that Avalon should NOT be the home of Merlin, and I am lobbying > for the support of a Merlin Top Level Project. > > == Purpose == > Merlin is so much more than what the founders of Avalon anticipated, and the > Merlin committer crew (esp. myself, Steve, Alex, and Timmothy) feels that > there are an unnecessary restrictions on how we can evolve Merlin, without > creating fear at the other projects depending on Avalon. > > We think it is better for Merlin to be a user of Avalon Framework, like > Excalibur, Loom, James and Cocoon are, without any special privileges or > obligations. > > The Merlin committers wants to forge ahead with a vision of a serious > alternative/compliment to J2EE, where component oriented programming finally > gets to its full potential as an efficiency enabler. > > We want to send a clear message that Merlin is not a 'project' shuffled into a > backyard called Avalon, but that it is a serious _product_, on par with other > ambitious products in ASF like Geronimo, Cocoon and Eve. Avalon have lately > had as many or more web site visitors[1] than high profile projects like > Struts, Tomcat and Ant. This is a sign that there is a strong interest out > there, and that we need to channel this interest into a stronger community. > > I think that a Merlin Top Level Project is due, the technology and community > is mature, the increased visibility will spark even higher interests, and > that we can accelerate the development of the platform better without the > concerns of Avalon legacy. > > The Merlin committer crew is also determined to increase the frequency of > releases, especially on facilities and generic components. Less of our energy > will be spent on the 'infamous in-fightings of Avalon', and we can serve the > community better. > > > == Mitigation of Consequence to Users == > This will not be a pain-free exercise. > If we are granted "The Apache Merlin project" (http://merlin.apache.org), we > will most probably be required to change the codebase package names. > > However, I hope that we will be able to bridge the inconvenience for the > "Facilities Users", who would have wrong classnames for the facility > declaration, so that Merlin will explicitly recognize both namespaces for > some time, and generate a deprecation warning. > > Native normal components would work as without change. > > Blocks (aggregated components, i.e. block.xml files) should also work without > change. > > Applications that embedds Merlin is the only major area, where we can't > provide a smooth transition. I.e. import statements will have to change, but > with modern IDEs (alt. some script files), the work would be fairly straight > forward and quick. > > > == YOUR action is required == > > I NEED you to respond to this mail. If you like the sound of this idea, just > send a mail to the list saying exactly that. If you think this is not a good > idea, please express that too, to this list. This is not a vote, just a call > for support.
I'm in favor with whatever you guys think is best for Merlin. I'm not so sure a top-level project will increase visibility, as then Merlin will be just one among the other Avalon containers, instead of the reference platform. -- Bruno Dumon http://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
