On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 07:56 -0500, Peter Hunsberger wrote: ... > > Actually it should not that be hard to port the i18n. IMO that is a MUST > > HAVE featured and was very surprised to not find anything. > > > > I'd agree, if we are going to use C3 in the future we will also need > this feature. I like your option of having a single Spring based > transformer that works for both C2.2 and C3 but don't know if it is > any simpler to do? I'd go with whatever is easiest to do at this > point...
Basically both alternatives are based on the refactoring to spring. Meaning remove avalon/excalibur deps the only different is to create a wrapper class afterwards (to be compatible with 2.2 caching -> adding some of thos deps again). However I guess c3 only for is easiest for everyone more familiar with c3. If we have a rewrite I can create the c2.2 wrapper quite easy so I say do the c3 and when finish I do the rest. ;) Basically: AbstractI18n = spring based transformer no deps to either c3/2.2 - c3I18n extends AbstractI18n implements c3CorrespondingInterfaces - c2I18n extends AbstractI18n implements c2CorrespondingInterfaces salu2 -- Thorsten Scherler <thorsten.at.apache.org> codeBusters S.L. - web based systems <consulting, training and solutions> http://www.codebusters.es/
