>> >> We do? I don't. Wrapper it with an avalon thing, but I'll -1 the hell > > > Shut up, Andrew, I know all this, you know all this, in fact this is > what the thread is all about: Avalon makes sense for Services, and POI > is a Services but NOT made on services. > > Don't worry. >
Then I must have totally misunderstood the conversation. Boy man. I love this community... its the ultimate flamefest. Over the past month you chew up peter. I see an issue I care about (the "lets avalonize EVERYTHING and have one huge dependency tree from h*ll" issue), say something and Berin verbally flogs me. I extend your example and I'm off topic. Sorry that a non-club member posted. Go back to your regular programming. To think someone gave a talk on services to the our jug the other night and I was like "Dude you must get involved in avalon" -- I think I'll revise that to "leech but don't dare post on any issue" next time I see him. gosh. >> out of any attempt to make the bits and pieces avalonized. And I'll fly >> over to Italy and beat you (nkb) with a wet noodle if you mark anything >> with LogEnabled in POI. Its inappropriate IMHO in a low level API. > > > Gee, man, I did it before, it was shit, I changed it to our wrapper again. > See, I'm innocent! > > It was you that asked to alavonize it, and I came to the conclusion that > it didn't make sense low level. > No news under the sun. > surely I must have been sleep deprived. I don't remember the conversation, but I believe you. There are some blackout periods that I barely remember. (like those days where I was sorting through the Cocoon code at the mess of gazillion interfaces and dependancies trying to debug some little nuiance) > <snip/> > >> NOT everything tht CAN be avalonized should be. > > > The nail, the hammer... > The screw, nut or bolt, the hammer... > > Less is more. > > Nonsense sentence. > no.. cliche. -Andy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
