You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@commons.apache.org by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org> on 2002/10/24 11:42:11 UTC
[PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Dear Avalon and Turbine Community,
following prior discussions I had with you, I'm writing here to make
a proposal about a common codespace.
Turbine services will most probably become Avalon Components/Services
(C/S), and Avalon already has a lot of them too: currently they are in
Cornerstone and Excalibur.
Using a common framework will bring us closer, and will make it possible
for us to _finally_ share code in terms of C/S.
As history has showed me, external projects that use Avalon Components
are happy to be able to offload their maintainance, but this is only
when all works well... I'm sure that many users of these components
would be happy to be involved more directly in the management of their code.
I think that if Turbine devs could interact more directly with the code
of existing Avalon C/S they would use _them_ instead of making another
version. Likewise for Avalon devs.
Thus I propose that we create our dev-space about Avalon-based C/S
inside the new Apache Commons Project, and be able to share commit
privileges between our committers on a per-component basis.
This is to enable collaboration without the fear that yet-unknown
committers will step all over our code.
This has been already proposed on the Apache Commons list and seems ok.
If you want to partecipate in a common discussion about this:
general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
Thank you.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: [PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Dear Avalon and Turbine Community,
[...]
> I think that if Turbine devs could interact more directly with the code
> of existing Avalon C/S they would use _them_ instead of making another
> version. Likewise for Avalon devs.
BTW, I have already recieved mails from people eager to partecipate in
this, and jakarta-ojb for example has an Avalon component they would
probably move to Commons Avalon.
So now it's clearly not only Avalon and Turbine as it seemed in the
mail, and of course we shouldn't forget Cocoon components too.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Peter Donald wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I like the idea but can we let it incubate for a bit. There is large number of
>changes that are currently going on in Apache. I think we will find that
>large chunks of Avalon will move to either the incubator.apache.org or
>commons.apache.org projects. In both of these cases it will just take time.
>
>
I agree - but I do think discussion outside of Avalon is good thing.
>In some of these cases the specific components when they move may also take
>some of the Avalon services. ie Currently Extension is void of references to
>Avalon, it may be that we migrate the service back from Phoenix into
>Extension toolkit when it moves to commons.apache.org. So in this case it may
>be best to instead have a registry of services for Avalon and allow people to
>pick them up from different places as they desire.
>
>
Makes sence.
>There is also the problem of interoperability. Not all the components are
>interoperable. Some are restricted to Phoenix, some are restricted to Cocoons
>ECM/Fortress managers and some are generic. Some will also presumably be
>specific to Turbines container.
>
>
... one of the interesting things about specifics is establishing why a
container specific feature is needed. In some cases its a container
extension but in other cases its a question more related to the
component model itself and need to provide richer functionality. An
example of this is the extensions mechanism available in Fortreee and
Merlin. Other examples (closer to things I'm dealing with today are the
differences between component implementations that can be defined
statically versus components whose services are a function of their
configuration, or deployment). These are the sort of things that are
extractable from "non-portable" components and collectively establish
requirements that Avalon should be looking at in terms of the
framework's development.
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
OSM SARL
digital products for a global economy
mailto:mcconnell@osm.net
http://www.osm.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org> writes:
> > However in the meantime if there is any Turbine committers who want
> > to have access to any avalon repos then just say the word and we can
> > try and work something out.
>
> :-D Cool! +1
I would like access to where ever Avalon currently stores its
components and blocks. I'm interested in porting any Fulcrum Services
which John and Jason haven't done yet (that I use) over to the Avalon
APIs. As noted in Nicola's "How Avalon may change Turbine" email a
while back, some of our (specifically, web-centric) components may be
more appropriately stored in Turbine repos, but other services (like
our XML-RPC service) would make make a great block.
John, Jason: will you guys respond with a list of Fulcrum services
which you've already ported? My apologies if this repeats information
you've already posted, but I'm (of course) interested in the most
recent information.
> Now, what should be best:
> 1) let them keep it and reference it
> 2) accept it in Avalon
> 3) put it in Commons
>
> I'd go for 1 for now, what do others think?
I think that 1 may be the way to go across the board. Using Fulcrum
as an example, a lot of our service code is just wrappers around
Jakarta Commons components (which themselves have no dependency upon
Fulcrum). Mixing Avalon-dependent code into the Apache Commons seems
like it makes the most sense when that code can run without Avalon
(like the case for some of the Jakarta Commons components wrapped with
Fulcrum services). Just my $0.02.
--
Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org> writes:
> > However in the meantime if there is any Turbine committers who want
> > to have access to any avalon repos then just say the word and we can
> > try and work something out.
>
> :-D Cool! +1
I would like access to where ever Avalon currently stores its
components and blocks. I'm interested in porting any Fulcrum Services
which John and Jason haven't done yet (that I use) over to the Avalon
APIs. As noted in Nicola's "How Avalon may change Turbine" email a
while back, some of our (specifically, web-centric) components may be
more appropriately stored in Turbine repos, but other services (like
our XML-RPC service) would make make a great block.
John, Jason: will you guys respond with a list of Fulcrum services
which you've already ported? My apologies if this repeats information
you've already posted, but I'm (of course) interested in the most
recent information.
> Now, what should be best:
> 1) let them keep it and reference it
> 2) accept it in Avalon
> 3) put it in Commons
>
> I'd go for 1 for now, what do others think?
I think that 1 may be the way to go across the board. Using Fulcrum
as an example, a lot of our service code is just wrappers around
Jakarta Commons components (which themselves have no dependency upon
Fulcrum). Mixing Avalon-dependent code into the Apache Commons seems
like it makes the most sense when that code can run without Avalon
(like the case for some of the Jakarta Commons components wrapped with
Fulcrum services). Just my $0.02.
--
Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org> writes:
> > However in the meantime if there is any Turbine committers who want
> > to have access to any avalon repos then just say the word and we can
> > try and work something out.
>
> :-D Cool! +1
I would like access to where ever Avalon currently stores its
components and blocks. I'm interested in porting any Fulcrum Services
which John and Jason haven't done yet (that I use) over to the Avalon
APIs. As noted in Nicola's "How Avalon may change Turbine" email a
while back, some of our (specifically, web-centric) components may be
more appropriately stored in Turbine repos, but other services (like
our XML-RPC service) would make make a great block.
John, Jason: will you guys respond with a list of Fulcrum services
which you've already ported? My apologies if this repeats information
you've already posted, but I'm (of course) interested in the most
recent information.
> Now, what should be best:
> 1) let them keep it and reference it
> 2) accept it in Avalon
> 3) put it in Commons
>
> I'd go for 1 for now, what do others think?
I think that 1 may be the way to go across the board. Using Fulcrum
as an example, a lot of our service code is just wrappers around
Jakarta Commons components (which themselves have no dependency upon
Fulcrum). Mixing Avalon-dependent code into the Apache Commons seems
like it makes the most sense when that code can run without Avalon
(like the case for some of the Jakarta Commons components wrapped with
Fulcrum services). Just my $0.02.
--
Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Peter Donald wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I like the idea but can we let it incubate for a bit. There is large number of
> changes that are currently going on in Apache. I think we will find that
> large chunks of Avalon will move to either the incubator.apache.org or
> commons.apache.org projects. In both of these cases it will just take time.
Yes.
> In some of these cases the specific components when they move may also take
> some of the Avalon services. ie Currently Extension is void of references to
> Avalon, it may be that we migrate the service back from Phoenix into
> Extension toolkit when it moves to commons.apache.org. So in this case it may
> be best to instead have a registry of services for Avalon and allow people to
> pick them up from different places as they desire.
ATM it's *definately* a good idea :-)
So, where do we set up the common page about all Avalon available
components?
IMHO on the commons.apache.org site, along with the statement that
collaboration is in place for a common repository to happen.
> There is also the problem of interoperability. Not all the components are
> interoperable. Some are restricted to Phoenix, some are restricted to Cocoons
> ECM/Fortress managers and some are generic. Some will also presumably be
> specific to Turbines container.
>
> One of the things that will hopefully fixed over the next year will be these
> interoperability problems. However until then it may be best to avoid such a
> global repository.
Hmmm, probably... or the problem wil always exist.
I'm hesitant when having to wait because "the next big thing" will
eventually happen...
Many problems will go away, but other problems will emerge, because each
solution brings its own problems.
IMHO we should not be concerned about the interoperability problems on
the common repository; assume that Phoenix wants to use a Cocoon
component, and cannot because of interoperability.
It will try to work it out. So it will probably become interoperability
from evolution, from the bottom.
A common page with references to the components is certainly a big first
step, but interoperability should not stop us from planning the details
of the project, the rules, the management.
> However in the meantime if there is any Turbine committers who want to have
> access to any avalon repos then just say the word and we can try and work
> something out.
:-D Cool! +1
Also, there is an Avalon Component done by the OBJ team, that has been
proposed to me privately for the eventual Commons Avalon repository.
Now, what should be best:
1) let them keep it and reference it
2) accept it in Avalon
3) put it in Commons
I'd go for 1 for now, what do others think?
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Peter Donald wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I like the idea but can we let it incubate for a bit. There is large number of
> changes that are currently going on in Apache. I think we will find that
> large chunks of Avalon will move to either the incubator.apache.org or
> commons.apache.org projects. In both of these cases it will just take time.
Yes.
> In some of these cases the specific components when they move may also take
> some of the Avalon services. ie Currently Extension is void of references to
> Avalon, it may be that we migrate the service back from Phoenix into
> Extension toolkit when it moves to commons.apache.org. So in this case it may
> be best to instead have a registry of services for Avalon and allow people to
> pick them up from different places as they desire.
ATM it's *definately* a good idea :-)
So, where do we set up the common page about all Avalon available
components?
IMHO on the commons.apache.org site, along with the statement that
collaboration is in place for a common repository to happen.
> There is also the problem of interoperability. Not all the components are
> interoperable. Some are restricted to Phoenix, some are restricted to Cocoons
> ECM/Fortress managers and some are generic. Some will also presumably be
> specific to Turbines container.
>
> One of the things that will hopefully fixed over the next year will be these
> interoperability problems. However until then it may be best to avoid such a
> global repository.
Hmmm, probably... or the problem wil always exist.
I'm hesitant when having to wait because "the next big thing" will
eventually happen...
Many problems will go away, but other problems will emerge, because each
solution brings its own problems.
IMHO we should not be concerned about the interoperability problems on
the common repository; assume that Phoenix wants to use a Cocoon
component, and cannot because of interoperability.
It will try to work it out. So it will probably become interoperability
from evolution, from the bottom.
A common page with references to the components is certainly a big first
step, but interoperability should not stop us from planning the details
of the project, the rules, the management.
> However in the meantime if there is any Turbine committers who want to have
> access to any avalon repos then just say the word and we can try and work
> something out.
:-D Cool! +1
Also, there is an Avalon Component done by the OBJ team, that has been
proposed to me privately for the eventual Commons Avalon repository.
Now, what should be best:
1) let them keep it and reference it
2) accept it in Avalon
3) put it in Commons
I'd go for 1 for now, what do others think?
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Peter Donald wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I like the idea but can we let it incubate for a bit. There is large number of
> changes that are currently going on in Apache. I think we will find that
> large chunks of Avalon will move to either the incubator.apache.org or
> commons.apache.org projects. In both of these cases it will just take time.
Yes.
> In some of these cases the specific components when they move may also take
> some of the Avalon services. ie Currently Extension is void of references to
> Avalon, it may be that we migrate the service back from Phoenix into
> Extension toolkit when it moves to commons.apache.org. So in this case it may
> be best to instead have a registry of services for Avalon and allow people to
> pick them up from different places as they desire.
ATM it's *definately* a good idea :-)
So, where do we set up the common page about all Avalon available
components?
IMHO on the commons.apache.org site, along with the statement that
collaboration is in place for a common repository to happen.
> There is also the problem of interoperability. Not all the components are
> interoperable. Some are restricted to Phoenix, some are restricted to Cocoons
> ECM/Fortress managers and some are generic. Some will also presumably be
> specific to Turbines container.
>
> One of the things that will hopefully fixed over the next year will be these
> interoperability problems. However until then it may be best to avoid such a
> global repository.
Hmmm, probably... or the problem wil always exist.
I'm hesitant when having to wait because "the next big thing" will
eventually happen...
Many problems will go away, but other problems will emerge, because each
solution brings its own problems.
IMHO we should not be concerned about the interoperability problems on
the common repository; assume that Phoenix wants to use a Cocoon
component, and cannot because of interoperability.
It will try to work it out. So it will probably become interoperability
from evolution, from the bottom.
A common page with references to the components is certainly a big first
step, but interoperability should not stop us from planning the details
of the project, the rules, the management.
> However in the meantime if there is any Turbine committers who want to have
> access to any avalon repos then just say the word and we can try and work
> something out.
:-D Cool! +1
Also, there is an Avalon Component done by the OBJ team, that has been
proposed to me privately for the eventual Commons Avalon repository.
Now, what should be best:
1) let them keep it and reference it
2) accept it in Avalon
3) put it in Commons
I'd go for 1 for now, what do others think?
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: [PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@apache.org>.
Hi,
I like the idea but can we let it incubate for a bit. There is large number of
changes that are currently going on in Apache. I think we will find that
large chunks of Avalon will move to either the incubator.apache.org or
commons.apache.org projects. In both of these cases it will just take time.
In some of these cases the specific components when they move may also take
some of the Avalon services. ie Currently Extension is void of references to
Avalon, it may be that we migrate the service back from Phoenix into
Extension toolkit when it moves to commons.apache.org. So in this case it may
be best to instead have a registry of services for Avalon and allow people to
pick them up from different places as they desire.
There is also the problem of interoperability. Not all the components are
interoperable. Some are restricted to Phoenix, some are restricted to Cocoons
ECM/Fortress managers and some are generic. Some will also presumably be
specific to Turbines container.
One of the things that will hopefully fixed over the next year will be these
interoperability problems. However until then it may be best to avoid such a
global repository.
However in the meantime if there is any Turbine committers who want to have
access to any avalon repos then just say the word and we can try and work
something out.
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 19:42, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Dear Avalon and Turbine Community,
>
> following prior discussions I had with you, I'm writing here to make
> a proposal about a common codespace.
>
> Turbine services will most probably become Avalon Components/Services
> (C/S), and Avalon already has a lot of them too: currently they are in
> Cornerstone and Excalibur.
>
> Using a common framework will bring us closer, and will make it possible
> for us to _finally_ share code in terms of C/S.
>
> As history has showed me, external projects that use Avalon Components
> are happy to be able to offload their maintainance, but this is only
> when all works well... I'm sure that many users of these components
> would be happy to be involved more directly in the management of their
> code.
>
> I think that if Turbine devs could interact more directly with the code
> of existing Avalon C/S they would use _them_ instead of making another
> version. Likewise for Avalon devs.
>
> Thus I propose that we create our dev-space about Avalon-based C/S
> inside the new Apache Commons Project, and be able to share commit
> privileges between our committers on a per-component basis.
> This is to enable collaboration without the fear that yet-unknown
> committers will step all over our code.
>
> This has been already proposed on the Apache Commons list and seems ok.
>
> If you want to partecipate in a common discussion about this:
>
> general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
>
> Thank you.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
--------------------------------
These aren't the droids you're
looking for. Move along.
--------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@apache.org>.
Hi,
I like the idea but can we let it incubate for a bit. There is large number of
changes that are currently going on in Apache. I think we will find that
large chunks of Avalon will move to either the incubator.apache.org or
commons.apache.org projects. In both of these cases it will just take time.
In some of these cases the specific components when they move may also take
some of the Avalon services. ie Currently Extension is void of references to
Avalon, it may be that we migrate the service back from Phoenix into
Extension toolkit when it moves to commons.apache.org. So in this case it may
be best to instead have a registry of services for Avalon and allow people to
pick them up from different places as they desire.
There is also the problem of interoperability. Not all the components are
interoperable. Some are restricted to Phoenix, some are restricted to Cocoons
ECM/Fortress managers and some are generic. Some will also presumably be
specific to Turbines container.
One of the things that will hopefully fixed over the next year will be these
interoperability problems. However until then it may be best to avoid such a
global repository.
However in the meantime if there is any Turbine committers who want to have
access to any avalon repos then just say the word and we can try and work
something out.
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 19:42, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Dear Avalon and Turbine Community,
>
> following prior discussions I had with you, I'm writing here to make
> a proposal about a common codespace.
>
> Turbine services will most probably become Avalon Components/Services
> (C/S), and Avalon already has a lot of them too: currently they are in
> Cornerstone and Excalibur.
>
> Using a common framework will bring us closer, and will make it possible
> for us to _finally_ share code in terms of C/S.
>
> As history has showed me, external projects that use Avalon Components
> are happy to be able to offload their maintainance, but this is only
> when all works well... I'm sure that many users of these components
> would be happy to be involved more directly in the management of their
> code.
>
> I think that if Turbine devs could interact more directly with the code
> of existing Avalon C/S they would use _them_ instead of making another
> version. Likewise for Avalon devs.
>
> Thus I propose that we create our dev-space about Avalon-based C/S
> inside the new Apache Commons Project, and be able to share commit
> privileges between our committers on a per-component basis.
> This is to enable collaboration without the fear that yet-unknown
> committers will step all over our code.
>
> This has been already proposed on the Apache Commons list and seems ok.
>
> If you want to partecipate in a common discussion about this:
>
> general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
>
> Thank you.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
--------------------------------
These aren't the droids you're
looking for. Move along.
--------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Dear Avalon and Turbine Community,
[...]
> I think that if Turbine devs could interact more directly with the code
> of existing Avalon C/S they would use _them_ instead of making another
> version. Likewise for Avalon devs.
BTW, I have already recieved mails from people eager to partecipate in
this, and jakarta-ojb for example has an Avalon component they would
probably move to Commons Avalon.
So now it's clearly not only Avalon and Turbine as it seemed in the
mail, and of course we shouldn't forget Cocoon components too.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Dear Avalon and Turbine Community,
[...]
> I think that if Turbine devs could interact more directly with the code
> of existing Avalon C/S they would use _them_ instead of making another
> version. Likewise for Avalon devs.
BTW, I have already recieved mails from people eager to partecipate in
this, and jakarta-ojb for example has an Avalon component they would
probably move to Commons Avalon.
So now it's clearly not only Avalon and Turbine as it seemed in the
mail, and of course we shouldn't forget Cocoon components too.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: [PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@apache.org>.
Hi,
I like the idea but can we let it incubate for a bit. There is large number of
changes that are currently going on in Apache. I think we will find that
large chunks of Avalon will move to either the incubator.apache.org or
commons.apache.org projects. In both of these cases it will just take time.
In some of these cases the specific components when they move may also take
some of the Avalon services. ie Currently Extension is void of references to
Avalon, it may be that we migrate the service back from Phoenix into
Extension toolkit when it moves to commons.apache.org. So in this case it may
be best to instead have a registry of services for Avalon and allow people to
pick them up from different places as they desire.
There is also the problem of interoperability. Not all the components are
interoperable. Some are restricted to Phoenix, some are restricted to Cocoons
ECM/Fortress managers and some are generic. Some will also presumably be
specific to Turbines container.
One of the things that will hopefully fixed over the next year will be these
interoperability problems. However until then it may be best to avoid such a
global repository.
However in the meantime if there is any Turbine committers who want to have
access to any avalon repos then just say the word and we can try and work
something out.
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 19:42, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Dear Avalon and Turbine Community,
>
> following prior discussions I had with you, I'm writing here to make
> a proposal about a common codespace.
>
> Turbine services will most probably become Avalon Components/Services
> (C/S), and Avalon already has a lot of them too: currently they are in
> Cornerstone and Excalibur.
>
> Using a common framework will bring us closer, and will make it possible
> for us to _finally_ share code in terms of C/S.
>
> As history has showed me, external projects that use Avalon Components
> are happy to be able to offload their maintainance, but this is only
> when all works well... I'm sure that many users of these components
> would be happy to be involved more directly in the management of their
> code.
>
> I think that if Turbine devs could interact more directly with the code
> of existing Avalon C/S they would use _them_ instead of making another
> version. Likewise for Avalon devs.
>
> Thus I propose that we create our dev-space about Avalon-based C/S
> inside the new Apache Commons Project, and be able to share commit
> privileges between our committers on a per-component basis.
> This is to enable collaboration without the fear that yet-unknown
> committers will step all over our code.
>
> This has been already proposed on the Apache Commons list and seems ok.
>
> If you want to partecipate in a common discussion about this:
>
> general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
>
> Thank you.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
--------------------------------
These aren't the droids you're
looking for. Move along.
--------------------------------
Re: [PROPOSAL] Avalon Component repository in Apache Commons
Posted by Peter Royal <pr...@apache.org>.
On Thursday, October 24, 2002, at 05:42 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Thus I propose that we create our dev-space about Avalon-based C/S
> inside the new Apache Commons Project, and be able to share commit
> privileges between our committers on a per-component basis.
> This is to enable collaboration without the fear that yet-unknown
> committers will step all over our code.
>
> This has been already proposed on the Apache Commons list and seems ok.
Excellent idea! The bulk of the Avalon Excalibur (sub-sub project)
could probably find a home here. Helping refine Avalon's core purpose
in the process and providing proper visibility and a shared space for
all Avalon users.
+1
-pete
--
peter royal -> proyal@apache.org