You asked for my personal opinion, and I am not slow to express :o) On Wednesday 10 March 2004 16:53, J Aaron Farr wrote:
> 1. Why do I use Avalon? Improve productivity mainly for long-running, server-type applications, and ultimately create new ways to produce software. > 2. What do I feel Avalon's mission to be? A strong Contract & Specification driven Component Oriented Programming model/platform/framework, with a Test Compatibility Kit (TCK) for each defined specification, for each the Components and the Containers respectively. > 3. Where do I see Avalon by the end of 2004? That some specifications are nailed down, and that one or more containers and IDE tools support these specifications. Also that some more specifications are on their way to be defined. > 4. How do I feel about Avalon as an umbrella project vs. a single > product? No strong feeling, but with the current set of active developers, it is hard to see beyond the reference container. > 5. Should there be a formal framework specification? YES! > 6. If so, what should it consist of? There is no need for a single specification. The initial specification must be about how does components declare which specifiactions they support and require, and how containers can know what to do with 'future compatibility' issues, like "ignore" or "fail". Secondly, I think AF4 LifeCycle specification, and thirdly the Identification & Packaging issues must be addressed. Cheers Niclas -- +---------//-------------------+ | http://www.bali.ac | | http://niclas.hedhman.org | +------//----------------------+ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
