> * Excalibur is not a major implementation of the the Framework. It
> contains utility stuff to create containers and some containers
The fact that it contains stuff to implement containers, and containers
expose the Framework to pluggable components was the sense in which I meant
it, but I see how my overly simple definition was in error. I appreciate
your correction / clarification.
> * Avalon Containers is not there
I didn't mean to label it like a module. :-) More of a conceptual
grouping. But it sounds from your own note that you think it should be a
module.
> 1) Avalon becomes a single repository with framework and utilities. All
utilities that are not Avalon-specific move to J-Commons- or Commons.
Agreed. The only thing that gave me pause is to ensure that there is a
loose coupling between Frameworks and Avalon-specific utilities.
> Yes, as I tried to outline above the conceptual separation emains.
> And yes, we must better define the relations especially with regards to
> component protability.
That's all I was saying. :-) Your comments indicate that you are quite in
agreement.
--- Noel
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
