Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-avalon-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 38582 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2002 07:01:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Aug 2002 07:01:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 28518 invoked by uid 97); 2 Aug 2002 07:02:03 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 28461 invoked by uid 97); 2 Aug 2002 07:02:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Avalon Developers List" Reply-To: "Avalon Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 28449 invoked by uid 98); 2 Aug 2002 07:02:02 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4198 created Apr 24 2002) Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] .NET implementation of Avalon framework. From: Leo Simons To: Avalon Developers List In-Reply-To: <200208021118.03625.peter@apache.org> References: <00ca01c23995$752f0000$e2d99ec2@jeff> <200208021118.03625.peter@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 Date: 02 Aug 2002 09:01:35 +0200 Message-Id: <1028271696.1414.7.camel@lsd.bdv51> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > I am very very interested in seeing in seeing Yauheny's work move to Avalon. > While I personally don't use C# yet and don't have plans to, but it would be > good to see the ideas used in another domain and it may suggest ways we could > improve the java version. +1. Really neat =) > Also if at any point in the future where mono becomes a more viable platform I > would love to move to an open system. (Though truth be told I would write a > .java to C# compiler ;]). Java is slightly more open than CLR and friends in > some ways and closed in other ways. yup =) some thoughts though: I don't think I will be doing anything with C# for some while (I'll wait for mono 1.0 I guess) so I certainly wouldn't be working/voting on any of it. I'm sure more people feel like that. Then, sometimes, maintaining a port is more work than just slowly diverging. I can see how Avalon 4 C# would not include Component, for example. If we do actually bring the port over to jakarta (rather than put it at avalonia or somethin') it seems we need an Avalon Specification and then an implementation in java and an implementation in C#, where both C# and java developers bother with the specs but not with both implementations. Dunno. I'd like whoever proposes this stuff to also take all this stuff into account. I'd also like an explicit statement from the PMC that they're okay with this (though I'm sure that if the board is, they should be too =). Anyway, small wrinkles only. I hope this turns out to be a success! Regardless of directions, this should be on the jakarta news page =) cheers, Leo Simons -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: