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.

> 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


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

View raw message