Peter Donald wrote:
> Sent: Saturday, 21 April, 2001 02:17
> To: Avalon Development
> Subject: Re: Status of framework beta release?
>
>
> At 11:29 20/4/01 +0200, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> >But I didn't made the step to actually use it because it's a so moving
> >target : how many times did the package organization change over the
> >last few weeks ? The component framework features seem somehow
> >stabilized now, but the classes are moving around and around. Having 2,
> >3 or even a single big jar isn't a problem (Avalon's not so big). The
> >real problem is naming stability.
>
> I would say stability in general hasn't been it's strong point ... lumping
> a whole bunch of junk into one jar (including stuff that is volatile - see
> excalibur) is not a way to achieve stability ;)
Reality check ...!!
1. we are not talking about "junk"
2. we are talking about a codebase that has not been sufficiently
tested to call beta
3. separation of this code base is not intended to achieve stability
4. separation of the code base will enable better manageability of
of volatile content
Steve.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
