tuscany-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon Laws <simonsl...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: lib directory in binary distro
Date Mon, 07 Jun 2010 09:56:46 GMT
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 1:02 AM, Simon Laws <simonslaws@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Raymond Feng <cyberfeng@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If we decide to have them in M5, we should document that it's experimental
>>>> and subject to further changes. The bottom line is that I want to make sure
>>>> the door is still open and the "existence" of such jars in M5 is NOT an
>>>> excuse to stay as-is in the future :-).
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Raymond
>>>
>>> In the past, people have told me multiple times that I can't change
>>> something because we have previously released it. So, as suggested by
>>> Raymond, if we release it, I want to make sure we clearly mention this
>>> is experimental and might go away in the future. My personal
>>> preference would be to make it available in trunk where people
>>> interested in this approach could evaluate/play with it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> My  feeling is that these are milestone releases as we head towards a
>> 2.0 release proper and I don't personally feel that there are sacred
>> cows in there, i.e. I don't subscribe to the "once it's it it can't be
>> removed" notion.
>>
>> We do need to have a discussion about the
>> format/structure/capabilities of the 2.0 release and when we think we
>> might be ready to create such a thing. To a certain a extent we've
>> been down this road before and for some reason it's not been plain
>> sailing. We do though need to reach some conclusions so that we can
>> get on with building the interesting stuff.  So first things first how
>> do people suggest we go about doing that?
>>
>> Simon
>>
>
> How about we start with a "simple paragraph" describing a use case
> which is not covered by the current manifest jar we have in modules.
> Once we have a clear understanding of what we are trying to solve, I
> guess we can start discussing if there is a way to enhance what we
> currently have or if we should create/continue with a new approach.
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>

Sounds reasonable. Anyone have scenario descriptions they want to share?

Simon

-- 
Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com

Mime
View raw message