interfaces vs base classes

["McCay, Larry" <LM...@Bluestone.com>]

Greetings,

I may have missed a previous discussion on this topic - if so I apologize.

I am wondering if someone could explain why we have changed to base classes
from interfaces for the Action and FormAction files.

Typically, I provide an interface an abstract implementation and sometimes a
default implementation of that.  I have thought that this provided the
greatest level of flexibility.

A couple things strike me as odd:

1. We are now limited to extending a single base class instead of
implementing the appropriate interface in a class which extends the most
meaningful base

2. We have also broken any existing customer code that implements them
directly - we won't want to make changes like this after 1.0 release

Thanks in advance,

Larry