Noel J. Bergman ha scritto: > I will go on record that I oppose a move to Spring, and have said so on > multiple occassions. However, I do not oppose optional support for Spring. > > So long as we are agreed on that, I'm +1 to on the latter.
I think I can confirm that the support is optional. The spring module is a standalone module with dependencies on the other modules, but none of our other modules will depend on the spring module. >> As a consequence, we would be able to release a Spring-container-based >> Server runtime besides our regular Avalon-based. > > I'll start another thread on Avalon. > > How much does your proposed merger effect the stability of code that > couldn't care less about Spring, e.g., the Avalon-based release? > > --- Noel AFAIK nothing changed in our "main" code in order to support the spring integration. Bernd did a great job in writing an almost generic Avalon container implementation based on Spring. Furthermore "his" container supports the phoenix config.xml/assembly.xml out of the box. At the moment the spring deployment is still avalon-based. The only component replaced by Bernd is Phoenix, not Avalon. That said the spring container will also make it simpler to integrate non-avalon components. I bet the spring deployment will be very appreciated by that part of our users that are also java developers. Stefano --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
