Niclas Hedhman wrote:
Being a die-hard Avalon supporter, I am all in favour of progress, but for the right reasons. Swapping ECM/Fortress for Spring/Pico doesn't change anything fundamentally. Only creates a lot of work for no immediate benefit.
The real challenge as someone pointed out, is the classloading management to support "real blocks". THAT is worth an effort, all IMHO of course.
Niclas,
let me suggest you to consider something that nobody else will explicitly say but "we are sick of avalon".
It doesn't matter how good it is, fortress, merlin, metro, you name it. It hurts. It's fragile.
Look at ant, xerces, xalan! Those are things you can count on. You *know* how painful it is to make excalibur running, how fragmented and careless the entire avalon community is.
Avalon = pain
ask around: james, the incubated directory project, even fulcrum. Ask them about avalon and they reply "if I knew then what I know now! :-(" [had this conversation, again, no longer than yesterday!]
Nicola, former PMC chair of avalon wrong "avalon must die!"
What else do you want? it's not a matter of cleaning up ECM, we want avalon to be considered legacy, we want to move away from it.
I don't know if Spring will be better, that's why I much rather would want to invent our own that to depend on somebody elses (writing a dep-inj container is piece of cake, c'mon)
it's not technology, it's psychology.
we have reached one of those "phase transitions" since avalon's interfaces for component lookup don't support the needs for real blocks.
mix the "sick and tired of avalon"-ness and you get an increase of entropy and an irreversible state transition.... but this community is strong, healthy, diverse and yet united on the move (even more so after the GT) so I see no problems, not for the project nor for the users.
-- Stefano.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
