Sylvain Wallez wrote: > As long as the compatibility layer remains, I don't see what > invites people to migrate to new features. Is it just because > new features will be available? Then having them because of > an updated old container or because of a newer one with a > legacy layer isn't very different in this regard, except that > new features are readily available in the second case. > > That's why I'm in favor of adding a legacy layer to something > new. I started the avalonization of Spring a few hours ago > and the more I dig, the more the technical issues I felt I > would hit disappear one after the other. I have to stop for > now as I have some urgent work to do for tomorrow (a new > training), but that's definitely the way I want to go instead > of adding new features on top of an old thing. > Adding new things on top of an old one provides a smooth migration path, as you can still use the old ones and one or two additional ones. If you have a compatibility layer this most often means that you can either use this layer or the new functionality. So there isn't a smooth migration path in this case.
Now, we don't have to add new functionality to the old one, but it is an option. And with this approach we are getting more independent from Avalon/Excalibur without loosing anything. Carsten
