Re: Resolution: Avalon metainformation tags

[Leo Simons]

I think that together with the x- for eXtension, "role" introduced 
instead of "service", this is the best compromise, +1

- Leo

Berin Loritsch wrote:
Fortress uses some tags in a non-standard way, and it adds one that is
not in existence.  Peter objects to poluting the Avalon namespace--I
agree on differing contracts for @avalon.component and @avalon.service;
however, we have a disagreement on @avalon.lifestyle.
I like Peter Royal's suggestion, so I propose the following:

1) Fortress gets in line with @avalon.component and @avalon.service
2) We introduce an @avalon-ext namespace for extensions we are wanting
   to experiment with that are not supposed to be container specific.
   In this case the first addition is the @avalon-ext.lifecycle.
I think this is the best compromise, and it will allow us to have
an "incubation" period for new tags.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]