Re: Cornerstone / AltRMI

Stephen McConnell wrote:

>
>
> Berin Loritsch wrote:
>
>>> From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>   
>>>
>>>> However, if it is as simple as *not* casting to a BlockContext,
>>>> then +1, remove the cast.
>>>>
>>>> If it consists of more effort, we should do an initial release and
>>>> then a neutral release.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>
>>> The casting requirements is the only computational issue  - the rest 
>>> is packaging.
>>>   
>>
>>
>>
>> Ok.  Let's get rid of the casting.  I can probably do that much.
>> As to packaging, we don't have a standard package architecture
>> for A4 components.  Sad, but true.  For the time being, let's
>> specify that the packaging remains the same.  In the future, lets
>> look at what it would take to at least cooperate between Phoenix
>> and Merlin.  Fortress will follow whatever we agree upon.
>>  
>>
>
> Packaging for Phoenix + Merlin is not a problem - just needs some 
> stuff in the build file and a couple of xml files in the src package 
> (which hyave already been prepared).  Phoenix generates content as 
> part of the build process whereas Merlin descriptors are explicit. The 
> content for this has been in place for ages - no issue to make it 
> happen. We can easily make these blocks Phoenix/Merlin savy and get 
> the release out based on this - then move forward with work on the 
> common model.
>
> Cheers, Steve.


Berin:

Actually - the easiest thing is if I commit the stuff that has already 
been tested and validated.  This is basically a bunch of .xtype and 
.xprofile files that coexists along side the component classes. The 
packaging is nothing more than including the xfile in the jar file. I'm 
drop these in - so you can take a look at what I'm talking about.

Cheers, Steve.


>
>> -- 
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>

-- 

Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:[email protected]
http://www.osm.net