On 29 Nov 2007, at 11:18, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
On Nov 29, 2007 11:16 AM, Philippe Lamote <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We use Tomahawk a lot in several projects. I would not like to see
tomahawk getting swallowed up in trinidad. Each has its place. I
would
prefer to seem the stay the way they are.
weren't you saying they should be unified ?
-- I was (& still am), the quote levels got mixed up. (my bad, sorry)
I don't see why unifying Tomahawk and Trinidada could pose a problem
to someone. If there is a guarantee that the merger takes into account
a high level of backward compatibility, what more is there to do than
swapping jars and prefixes? This could even be done automatically -
and obviously run tests again, just to be sure.
Why am I for a unification?
The reality is that all of us have very little or no time, this is the
single biggest project bottleneck. Therefore, having to divide this
precious time over several subprojects (with often redundant
functionality) seems to me a sorry waste of scarce resources, and thus
hurting all MF subproject lines.
Take an example: most people would agree facelets is good idea. The
Jsf 1.2 spec is out since May 11, 2006. We're 1,5 yr(one and a half
year!) further down the line but there is no working combination for
MF1.2 + Facelets + Tomahawk 2.0 (the latter, I've been told, is in
line with the MF 1.2 release , and indeed, I've had worse problems
using Toma 116 or 117 + MF1.2 + Facelets)
1,5 year. For those disagreeing: check this mailing list or the posted
bugs: they're about basic stuff not working.
Frankly I'm cornered with bugs for this combination to the extend I
will have to downgrade again to MF1.1. For a new project that I
started half a yr ago. This is sad.
I like Matthias's idea of a common base best. I hope the Toma/Trini
shells on top of it can be made very thin on the sort term (would be
very OO-spirited as well).
On the mid/long: this would allow to diverge between stable and
development components, kinda like Tomahawk and Sandbox now.
But of the stable components, I am convinced the best approach is to
have them all at verybody's disposal with just one prefix (it even
sounds obvious no? Or am I the only one).
--Wolf
