Gianugo Rabellino wrote: > On 1/2/06, Ralph Goers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>That seems to be a catch-22. How do you move away from Avalon without >>making these kind of changes? > Good question - I think noone is able to answer that one.
> > Honestly, I don't see how anything in the 2.x series could move away > from Avalon. Too much refactoring needed, too many issues on the > table. > Yeah, and I really don't understand this - I (and others) propose small but simple steps to a) improve using Cocoon and b) provide a smooth migration path. But even if these proposals do not include heavy refactoring and do not come with problems, people are blocking it and always point to the "we need a rewrite". Then if people are suggestion, let's rewrite, the same people (and others) complain that that is currently not an option. So in the end we are doomed. So I'm coming back to my idea, is anyone against adding constructor injection to ECM++ or at least make it pluggable so I can add it for my own projects? The change adds only a feature while maintaining 100% compatibility. Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG http://www.s-und-n.de http://www.osoco.org/weblogs/rael/
