avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Berin Loritsch <blorit...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Something Missing? (Was: [Avalon.NET] Status)
Date Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:02:07 GMT
Geer, Christopher S wrote:

> hammett wrote:
>>Just to make sure: we have the minimum set of interfaces defined (?)
> Is
>>there something missing or to be defined?
> Well, one of the advantages of being on vacation for a week is you have
> a lot of time on your hands to think, on disadvantage is you have a lot
> of time on your hands to think. Anyway, that was my situation last week
> and this question came up a lot. I'm not sure the framework, in its
> current state, has gone far enough (or maybe it has gone too far but
> still missed the mark it was trying to hit).

Well, let's avoid over-thinking it.

<snip type="other comments"/>

> ---
> If we go down the other path that the framework needs to be scaled back
> then maybe lifecycle and "component" definition shouldn't be included at
> all. Maybe the framework (not a really good name in this scenario but
> bare with it for now) should only contain the nano-kernel that Berin has
> been discussing. This nano-kernel would be just enough code to startup,
> find the available plug-ins and load them up. The plug-ins would then
> take care of things like lifecycle management, security and other
> functions so that they are replaceable over time. The framework would
> just define a base set of extension points for the core plug-ins while
> the plug-ins could then define more. (This idea has really stemmed from
> spending too much time reading up on the inner working of Eclipse if you
> hadn't noticed yet) This approach would really take us away from the
> competing container model because your container would be the collection
> of plug-ins that you need to get the job done. Obviously not every
> plug-in would work with every other one so there would still need to be
> "container projects", but they would be more responsible for having
> collected the plug-ins that they recommend.
> ---
> Anyway, this may be a bit of a radical view (or views really) but this
> might be the right time to start thinking about this since we have a
> testing arena with Avalon.NET. 

Then at this stage I suggest we start with the container code, and start
with the nano-container.  Ignore Framework for now, because without any
kind of foundation to work with it (i.e. container) there is no real use
for it.


"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
  deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                 - Benjamin Franklin

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

View raw message