[PROPOSAL] End the drama

[peter royal <pe...@pobox.com>]

On Jul 13, 2004, at 2:36 PM, Bennett, Timothy (JIS/Applications) wrote:
> As a member of the avant-garde, I only have two requirements in the 
> solution
> space:
>
> 1. Avalon-Framework not promoted as a Product
> 2. Not ready to re-version/re-brand Avalon as Avalon-5

Ah, but there in lines the paradox :)

Avalon-4 *WAS* Avalon-Framework

Avalon-4 *WAS* a Product.

I believe one can sum up all of the disagreements over the fact that 
Avalon-4 is now more than the framework, and is no longer a product.

I don't know what other's experience is in the commercial software 
market is, but sometimes you have to bump the version for marketing 
reasons. That's all that is being asked.

Bump everything to 5, and in doing so a clean line is drawn between the 
past and the future. What was planned for 5 can then be pushed to 6.

I propose:
  * Bump to Avalon 5.
  * On front page, under products, list:
    Current:
  	Merlin
    Legacy:
	Avalon Framework
	Components & Containers
  * Legacy Avalon-Framework will goto the 4.1 API docs and its limited 
documentation
  * Legacy Components & Containers will links to similar verbage as on 
the download page.

The past will not be hidden, and a clean line will be drawn for the 
future.
-pete

RE: [PROPOSAL] End the drama

["Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>]

peter royal wrote:
> Stephen McConnell wrote:
> > Avalon Framework is not legacy, Components are not legacy.
> Wait, which is it?
> Is A-F a Product or not? If it is no longer a Product, A-F as a Product
> is legacy.

Is that rhetorical?  If Frameworks and Components are not separate
packages, then how can we have anything except a single Avalon stack?  If
we want multiple stacks, which in context means multiple containers able
to use the underlying Frameworks, and Components compatible with that
container, then don't they need to be separate?

This gets back to my earlier point: either finding a way to have
collaboration on the shared parts of the stack, or forking here and now so
that we don't go through this nonsense every other week.

	--- Noel

Re: [PROPOSAL] End the drama

[peter royal <pe...@pobox.com>]

On Jul 13, 2004, at 4:32 PM, Stephen McConnell wrote:
> Sorry - this does not make sense.
>
> Avalon Framework is not legacy, Components are not legacy.

Wait, which is it?

Is A-F a Product or not? If it is no longer a Product, A-F as a Product 
is legacy.

> No - there are much better solutions - solutions that are based on 
> proper management of the documentation to properly reflect the 
> realities of the past and the realities of the present.

Can you then outline such a solution path so that others may see what 
you envision, and we can all agree that's the path to take?

3/4 of my solution was documentation-based (site), and one was 
technical (bumping version for perception purposes). Are you not 
willing to bump to v5 at this time to help move past this issue?
-pete

Re: [PROPOSAL] End the drama

[Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>]

peter royal wrote:

> On Jul 13, 2004, at 2:36 PM, Bennett, Timothy (JIS/Applications) wrote:
> 
>> As a member of the avant-garde, I only have two requirements in the 
>> solution
>> space:
>>
>> 1. Avalon-Framework not promoted as a Product
>> 2. Not ready to re-version/re-brand Avalon as Avalon-5
> 
> 
> Ah, but there in lines the paradox :)
> 
> Avalon-4 *WAS* Avalon-Framework
> 
> Avalon-4 *WAS* a Product.
> 
> I believe one can sum up all of the disagreements over the fact that 
> Avalon-4 is now more than the framework, and is no longer a product.
> 
> I don't know what other's experience is in the commercial software 
> market is, but sometimes you have to bump the version for marketing 
> reasons. That's all that is being asked.
> 
> Bump everything to 5, and in doing so a clean line is drawn between the 
> past and the future. What was planned for 5 can then be pushed to 6.
> 
> I propose:
>  * Bump to Avalon 5.
>  * On front page, under products, list:
>    Current:
>      Merlin
>    Legacy:
>     Avalon Framework
>     Components & Containers
>  * Legacy Avalon-Framework will goto the 4.1 API docs and its limited 
> documentation
>  * Legacy Components & Containers will links to similar verbage as on 
> the download page.
> 
> The past will not be hidden, and a clean line will be drawn for the future.
> -pete

Sorry - this does not make sense.

Avalon Framework is not legacy, Components are not legacy.
No - there are much better solutions - solutions that are based on 
proper management of the documentation to properly reflect the realities 
of the past and the realities of the present.

Stephen.



-- 

|---------------------------------------|
| Magic by Merlin                       |
| Production by Avalon                  |
|                                       |
| http://avalon.apache.org              |
|---------------------------------------|

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] End the drama

[Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>]

peter royal wrote:

> On Jul 13, 2004, at 2:36 PM, Bennett, Timothy (JIS/Applications) wrote:
> 
>> As a member of the avant-garde, I only have two requirements in the 
>> solution
>> space:
>>
>> 1. Avalon-Framework not promoted as a Product
>> 2. Not ready to re-version/re-brand Avalon as Avalon-5
> 
> 
> Ah, but there in lines the paradox :)
> 
> Avalon-4 *WAS* Avalon-Framework
> 
> Avalon-4 *WAS* a Product.
> 
> I believe one can sum up all of the disagreements over the fact that 
> Avalon-4 is now more than the framework, and is no longer a product.
> 
> I don't know what other's experience is in the commercial software 
> market is, but sometimes you have to bump the version for marketing 
> reasons. That's all that is being asked.
> 
> Bump everything to 5, and in doing so a clean line is drawn between the 
> past and the future. What was planned for 5 can then be pushed to 6.
> 
> I propose:
>  * Bump to Avalon 5.
>  * On front page, under products, list:
>    Current:
>      Merlin
>    Legacy:
>     Avalon Framework
>     Components & Containers
>  * Legacy Avalon-Framework will goto the 4.1 API docs and its limited 
> documentation
>  * Legacy Components & Containers will links to similar verbage as on 
> the download page.
> 
> The past will not be hidden, and a clean line will be drawn for the future.

Nice.

+1

-- 
Stefano.