avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Carsten Ziegeler" <cziege...@s-und-n.de>
Subject RE: Single Avalon Implementation yes/no/why/how ( Re: CVS organization )
Date Wed, 20 Nov 2002 10:53:08 GMT

Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> > Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> >
> [...]
> >>  3) The containers that are in the works, as cool as they seem to be,
> >>are still scratchpad stuff, and thus should be clearly put in a place
> >>where it's clear to all. Current structure is really confusing, and
> >>releases are a very important part of our system.
> >>
> >
> > And personally I'm still wondering if we really need different
> > implementations
> > with different features. But this is another topic, we should discuss
> > when it is time.
>
> Actually, I think it's time, and as for the topic, I've made a new one ;-)
>
Great :)

> It can be that we will eventually come to a single design, and in fact
> Merlin and Fortress developers have worked well on this. It seems to be
> doable, and probably it hasn't been so near.
>
> But it has to be agreed on by everyone, and everyone has to work on that
> codebase.
Ok.

>
> Phoenix is released, proved and really stable. Think that someone has
> even gotten James working on a C# based JVM (ok, technically it doesn't
> mean much but it's amusing that he tried it on James).
> Merlin and Fortress are new promising designs, that actually have been
> collaborating and partially converging.
>
> Technically it seems sensible that there be one framework and more
> possible implementations. Community-wise, I'm not so sure.
> Think for example about a Cocoon framework and multiple implementations.
> It's even hard to immagine.
>
Yes, this is exactly the point I'm also thinking about. Of course, the
concepts of Avalon are "generic" so that it is possible to have different
implementations for a framework. But personally, I doubt that this
is a good idea *if* the implementations offer different features.
If the implementations would only differ in performance, memory usage
etc - I would say, ok this makes sense and I can choose the
implementation which fits best my enironment (server application,
desktop application etc.)

> I still don't see major needs of having different implementations. Maybe
> different running environments, different profiles, but one
> implementation, as Cocoon has Serlet, CLI, etc running modes.
>
> But I also don't have a solution at hand; if we cannot come to a single
> implementation, probably it's because we still don't know how to do it.

Yes, that's possible.
Now, we could try to make a single implementation where all agree on
and only if this does not work - we can start several ones.
My perception is, that it is possible to reach a wide consensus on
this.

Carsten



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message