On Tuesday 06 January 2004 14:37, Giacomo Pati wrote:
> Stephen McConnell wrote:
> > As far as commit messages are concerned, please take into consideration
> > (a) commits on implementation improvements, (b) commits related to
> > sub-system relocation (i.e. system moving out of merlin and into av
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Giacomo Pati wrote:
Concerning Merlin I once had the impression that some of the feature
it offers are cool (i.e. default configurations aka profiles IIRC) but
others aren't that much (i.e. security). ATM I'm not in need for a
standalone container as most of my server
Giacomo Pati wrote:
Concerning Merlin I once had the impression that some of the feature it
offers are cool (i.e. default configurations aka profiles IIRC) but
others aren't that much (i.e. security). ATM I'm not in need for a
standalone container as most of my server apps are running with Phoe
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Tuesday 06 January 2004 05:48, Leo Simons wrote:
I don't even come close to having the time or the energy to do a
significant part of that.
Of course, you are the manager, and they never have time for anything :o)
Images of Leo in a suite ..
Hi,
> I have a feeling that Avalon, and specifically Merlin is focusing too much on
> the enterprise. I know that the enterprise features are necessary for some
Berin could you list the feature you consider 'Enterprise' features. I
just want to get an understanding of what you think is complic
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Tuesday 06 January 2004 05:48, Leo Simons wrote:
I don't even come close to having the time or the energy to do a
significant part of that.
Of course, you are the manager, and they never have time for anything :o)
Images of Leo in a suite
--
|---
On Tuesday 06 January 2004 05:48, Leo Simons wrote:
> * lines-of-code-to-lines-of-api-documentation (must go up)
I think you mean the other way (go down)...
Niclas
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional comm
On Tuesday 06 January 2004 05:48, Leo Simons wrote:
> > 2) how should we start refactoring Merlin to make it what we
> > all need?
> > * please note that development should be able to continue
> > while refactoring occurs.
>
> = Step 0 =
>
> is a feature freeze. Not code freeze, feature freez
Berin Loritsch wrote:
I posted a "feeler" question to the PMC group today just to get some
initial feedback. Considering the support from all parties, and the
concerns that I personally have, I would now like to get a bigger
picture of the whole Avalon developers group.
I have a feeling that
Leo Simons wrote:
I don't even come close to having the time or the energy to do a
significant part of that. I know Steve has it but it doesn't sound like
he wants to commit
when the system decomposition is clean and along the likely lines of
customization and change, extensibility will come na
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Leo Simons wrote:
Hi gang,
since Steve and Niclas been saying how much merlin has evolved, I am
giving it one last chance.
Give up while your ahead.
:-)
You sure have mastered those one-liners :P
seriously...here's a few more:
"If this was a competition, I would have
Leo Simons wrote:
Hi gang,
since Steve and Niclas been saying how much merlin has evolved, I am
giving it one last chance.
Give up while your ahead.
:-)
Cheers, Stephen.
--
||
| Magic by Merlin|
| Production by
> -Original Message-
> From: Leo Simons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> = releases =
>
> Remember my comment about being fit for a 1.0 release? Well, we did the
> "fortress will be released real soon now" for too long; we shouldn't be
> doing it with merlin. Regular, incremental releases,
Hi gang,
here at avalon, we don't add author tags to sourcefiles, except for:
@author mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">Avalon Development
Team
discussion and rationale for that are in the mailing list archives.
In summary, we want to discourage an ownership feeling for code (more
from others t
> 2) how should we start refactoring Merlin to make it what we
> all need?
> * please note that development should be able to continue
> while refactoring occurs.
= Step 0 =
is a feature freeze. Not code freeze, feature freeze. Development can
continue, but no new features. None.
= Step 1 =
T
Berin Loritsch wrote:
I have a feeling that Avalon, and specifically Merlin is focusing too
much on the enterprise.
+1. I'm going to enter rant mode now. Not meaning to offend anyone though.
I know that the enterprise features are
necessary for some folks, but others simply do not need it. It nev
Farr, Aaron wrote:
I've also been looking at this and my solution is a little more radical.
Basically, one of the issues with Merlin is that Merlin strictly controls
what you can get from the ServiceManager while Fortress and Phoenix are much
more liberal. This stems from what Stephen has appropri
> -Original Message-
> From: Leo Simons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 3:30 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [merlin] problems plugging in type 3 lifestyle
>
> Hi gang,
>
> since Steve and Niclas been saying how much merlin has evolved, I am
> giving it
Hi gang,
since Steve and Niclas been saying how much merlin has evolved, I am
giving it one last chance. Not as a user, but as a co-developer. I
figured I'd have a look at implementing IoC type 3 support (again).
Looking for a short execution path I could digest, I started reading in
AbstractM
Berin Loritsch wrote:
I have a feeling that Avalon, and specifically Merlin is focusing too
much on
the enterprise. I know that the enterprise features are necessary for some
folks, but others simply do not need it. It never really had
simplicity, and
to be honest I can't tell what it does a
I posted a "feeler" question to the PMC group today just to get some initial
feedback. Considering the support from all parties, and the concerns that I
personally have, I would now like to get a bigger picture of the whole Avalon
developers group.
I have a feeling that Avalon, and specifically Me
niclas 2004/01/05 07:51:38
Modified:security build.xml run.sh security.policy
security/src/tests Component.java ComponentImpl.java
InnerContainer.java InnerContainerImpl.java
Main.java OuterContainer.java
niclas 2004/01/05 07:42:31
Added: security build.properties build.xml run.sh security.policy
security/src/tests Component.java ComponentImpl.java
InnerContainer.java InnerContainerImpl.java
Main.java OuterContainer.java
niclas 2004/01/05 07:39:57
avalon-sandbox/security/src/tests - New directory
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
niclas 2004/01/05 07:39:37
avalon-sandbox/security/src - New directory
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
niclas 2004/01/05 07:39:03
avalon-sandbox/security - New directory
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Monday 05 January 2004 19:57, you wrote:
> Maybe you could give just a initial "wish-list", so that some of the
> eggs are out of your brain :-)
Let's start with a "small" list (and no guarantee that the eggs are not
rotten).
More eggs follows later.
Repository Browser
On Monday 05 January 2004 19:36, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> Also, I would like to have the @permission-requirement as close to the code
> as possible, method level, and that the "meta generator" can aggregate it.
This aggregation is for ALL classes in the implementation. There would also
need to be
Fist of all, thanks for the useful feedback
On Monday 05 January 2004 17:32, Stephen McConnell wrote:
> Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> I like the approach although think we need to separate the declaration
> of permission requirement from the granting of permissions. >
>
>demo
>
niclas 2004/01/05 02:51:11
Modified:xdocs/community/process pmc.xml
Log:
Removed Carsten and added myself.
Revision ChangesPath
1.2 +1 -1 avalon-site/xdocs/community/process/pmc.xml
Index: pmc.xml
"new" PMC members, could someone update this page to reflect recent
changes? Please remove Carsten from the list while you're at it.
--
cheers,
- Leo Simons
---
Weblog -- http://leosimons.com/
IoC Component Glue --
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
Gang,
Since deployment went fairly well, I now want to look into codebase level
Security (scheduled for 3.4).
NOTE!!! Please don't confuse this with Subject level Security and JAAS
leveraging. That is the next step. This must be sorted out first.
I have in mind that for
32 matches
Mail list logo
