> BTW - I also re-read the main docs again and a whole bunch of > references to > "server" have popped in again ... which I thought I deleted a > while back ;)
I actually removed a lot of those (not all) during my sweep through the docs. Sure you actually committed those changes? > Im curious why they were re-added in. My view is that most of > Avalon is not > server-specific - the framework is a Component Framework (not a server > Framework) and is aimed at general component based programming rather > rather than server specific etc. Would anyone mind if I reverted some of > that? Not at all... > As for what to do next - I would like to do the framework > javadocs. I would > prefer it if someone else was to write a basic how-to for the framework > section ;) I will tackle that _if_ I can find the time (I wrote half of it when my comp crashed, last time). > I will also try to correct any inconsistencies in the existing > high-level design orientated docs. lifecycle.xml still refers to Executable and Interruptable - should be an easy fix. Other than that, Excalibur really needs documentation badly. cheers! LSD --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
