> I agree that we shouldn't make current users feel disenfranchised, but we
> can do that in such a way that doesn't promote the framework as an Avalon
> product.
The Framework defines the core contracts between components and the
container (as well as utilities). Layered on that are reusable components,
and then we have containers. This comes across as little more than a tactic
to disenfranchise people who don't share the Merlin vision.
> There must be another way than what has been flaming over the dev
> and pmc lists the last few days.
Yes there is. I will quote myself:
So far, the view has been that the consequences of forking from
Frameworks up are not desirable. If that is still true, then
there is no choice but for everyone to suck it up, behave like
intelligent respectful adults and collaborate to find a consensus
that satisfies everyone. That may be code, that may be packaging,
it may be a combination of things. Just grow up and find it.
Either that, or fork from Frameworks on up and take the consequences.
Personally, I recommend and would prefer the former to seeing the
fallout from the latter.
> here's how we envision its use in the new Avalon
Who is "we"? If you are intending to drop compatibility with other Avalon
products such as Excalibur, etc., I suggest that we move Frameworks from the
stewardship of Avalon to Excalibur.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
