Leo Simons wrote:
rogerOn Fri, 2002-11-15 at 10:18, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:We also should decide where it goes, and some have hinted it could go side by side with the framework, although not being in the same package.
IMVHO it could be used as a simple reference implementation of the framework concepts and contracts.
Continuing the past proposal about a new unified CVS, thinking out loud:
./src/framework/**.java
./src/reference/**.java
./src/util/**.java
./scratchpad/src/merlin2/**.java
./scratchpad/src/fortress/**.java
Thoughts?
I think you can view Tweety as a concept implementation, but not as a reference implementation. One thing it doesn't do for example is protect components from each other, or guarantee that the stuff a component can get from its SM has run up to initialize(). There's a lot of stuff like that, and adding it all in would make the code complex to the level where it will be quite a bit more difficult to understand.
In fact I was thinking of eventually adding other systems egg-tweety-birdy-pigeon-etc, but yes, it's a concept implementation.
Where would you position it then phisically? I have no clue.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
