Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-avalon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 65583 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2004 17:16:12 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 12 Jul 2004 17:16:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 55962 invoked by uid 500); 12 Jul 2004 17:16:10 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-avalon-dev-archive@avalon.apache.org Received: (qmail 55902 invoked by uid 500); 12 Jul 2004 17:16:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@avalon.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 dev@avalon.apache.org Received: (qmail 55887 invoked by uid 99); 12 Jul 2004 17:16:10 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.3 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_RFC_IPWHOIS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [160.33.82.68] (HELO mail1.fw-sj.sony.com) (160.33.82.68) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 10:16:07 -0700 Received: from mail1.sgo.in.sel.sony.com (mail1.sgo.in.sel.sony.com [43.130.1.111]) by mail1.fw-sj.sony.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i6CHFtVW018026 for ; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 17:16:00 GMT Received: from us-sd-xims-1.am.sony.com (us-sd-xims-1.am.sony.com [43.131.1.30]) by mail1.sgo.in.sel.sony.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i6CHFtdw011026 for ; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 17:15:55 GMT Received: by us-sd-xims-1.am.sony.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 10:15:54 -0700 Message-ID: <03334AAF1DF8D2119B1000A0C9E32F58065EFEE6@us-pb-xmsg-2.am.sony.com> From: "Farr, Aaron" To: "'Avalon Developers List'" Subject: RE: Avalon Versions Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 10:15:52 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:mcconnell@apache.org] > > Sorry mate - your too late. AF 4.2 is out the door. Avalon is moving on. > There is nothing to resolve amicably because nobody (except Leo) has > raised a technical issue. And Leo's question is being drowned out in > layers of non-technical rubbish. This list is about technical things > and if someone cannot put together a reasonable technical argument then > just let it drop. It's not our problem. Then you won't mind if I delete the current site and re-instate the old site until we have a firm consensus on the versioning and framework documentation, right? I mean, it isn't a "technical" matter, right? Stephen, Last time, last warning: drop the technical vs non-technical argument. The *real* concerns here, as I understand them are: 1. Drop of Avalon Framework as a "product" 2. Lack of Framework 4.1 documentation or any "framework" documentation at all (the only related docs are labeled under "component specification") 3. Concern and confusion about the constructor injection feature moving from a Merlin-specific enhancement to a general Avalon framework feature. 4. General concern and confusion about the role of the traditional framework library in Avalon's future. There have been a number of solutions proposed: 1. Re-introduction of prior Avalon Framework documentation 2. If constructor injection is to be part of the general Avalon framework, we should consider a major version jump to Avalon 5.0 out of respect for the various Avalon related projects. Now, Stephen, would you please help everyone understand your concerns with these proposals? Please do not just dismiss them as "political" and thus not worth your time or attention. J. Aaron Farr SONY ELECTRONICS STP SYSTEMS (724) 696-7653 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org