"Waldhoff, Rodney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 16/10/2002 03:03:26 AM:
> For what it's worth, I think I'm with Ceki here. Jelly runs a real risk of > running into the same problems that Ant did with some of the intermediate > versions--it's so easy to extend, one gets lots of small extensions, each > independently useful and simple, but the overall package becomes a bit > incoherent. Hmmm....the jelly core seems coherent to me, but I've been working with it for a while. > I'd rather see something of a consolidation phase before Jelly moves out of > the sandbox (and is immediately pressured for a 1.0 release). What would you like to see consolidated? I'd prefer Jelly didn't go the way of Ant and integrate a whole swag of stuff into the 'core', so that the core could be free to be changed easily and extended. > - R -- dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting Work: http://www.multitask.com.au Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers
