[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: <snip/>
this proposal is that HiveMind be a top-level Jakarta project<snip/>
In terms of homes, I can see a number of possible options:<snip/>
3) Chuck it over to Avalon<snip/>
I've snipped out my opinions on the other options; not feeling much like re-re-hashing what basically are the same differences of opinion everytime :D.
But this one I will give some more thought (background: I'm an avalon committer who has evaluated HiveMind to some extent). First off: HiveMind definately fits the avalon charter. The problem space it plays in is roughly the same as the one avalon plays in.
But I'm weary of two things:
1) community seperation. There is very little community overlap between HiveMind and Avalon atm. Some attempts were made from both sides to perhaps create some synergy, but fact-of-the-matter is that community reuse is even harder than code reuse, and its not happening atm.
2) subprojects don't work well for avalon. Avalon has suffered greatly in the past from having multiple subprojects (what were subsubprojects at the time, even subsubsubprojects, as avalon was a jakarta subproject) with somewhat seperate communities. We really don't want that to happen again.
Howard lists some of many technical points (like type-1 vs type-2 vs type-3 IoC, flexibility vs security, block vs module, interception&dynamism vs declaration&validation) where HiveMind differs in approach from avalon, but I find those a lot less worrying than the points above. I'm quite sure that if some of the most active HiveMind and avalon coders get together on some kind of integration, it could be done before christmas :D
I suggest that, as that seems to be the general preference, the HiveMind community sees about becoming a jakarta subproject, knowing that seeking a home at avalon now or in the future is an option open to exploration at any time.
---
Danny Angus wrote: <more snips/> > I did wonder if there would be support @avalon for an alternative > approach as an avalon sub-project.
I think its safe to say that there is some, but as an avalon sub-project I think HiveMind would be a lot less autonomous than it would be as a jakarta subproject.
> The danger of having an Avalon alternative @jakarta is that it will be > seen by people as somehow being Jakarta's favoured solution, rather > than as one of two (or more) alternatives promoted by Avalon.
I'm not that afraid that this will pose an issue. After all, avalon is still linked to from the jakarta front page!
> but I don't want Jakarta to be accused of trying to replace Avalon, > and I guess that will mean involving Avalon folks in the discussion.
I don't think that will be an issue, but thanks for the heads-up!
cheers!
- Leo
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
