> > > On that note we previously voted on whether to split > > > avalon-framework.jar into two* -> > > > avalon-framework-api.jar and avalon-framework-refimpl.jar. > > > Can someone run thru the votes and see > > > if we got majority. It was a week ago I think. Can't do it > > > myself as on webmail presently. Maybe > > > it needs crisping up a little bit before enacting. > > > > I wasn't aware of that proposal/vote amid all the noise. > > > > -1 from me. There is no reason to split the framework into > > two jars. Not only is it already small, but the default > > implementations of the Configuration/Context/etc. are all > > part of the interface. I can't imagine what gains can be > > made by separating interface/implementation for the Jars. > > What about the Parameters object? There is no separate > > interface, although it is directly named in the Parameterizable > > interface. It provides no real benefit that I can see.
It's important for me on the EOB project, and many others who are just using A-F interfaces (and associated immutable beans) in their project internals. Not everyone is going to use the A-F implementation, it's quite a harmless change. Imagine if Catalina used our lifecycle interfaces instead of theirs for its internals... - Paul (from internet cafe) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
