RE: Avalon Components (Re: Our site is too big)

> From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[email protected]]
> 
> I think that we should now decide where to put the Avalon 
> components, if 
> in Apache Commons or Avalon Components.

:P  Careful now, we need to protect from feature creep


> I'm mildly in favor for avalon-components, where to put 
> cornerstone and 
> excalibur components, and give access to all projects that have a 
> representative in our PMC (as discussed for outer-avalon 
> people in the 
> PMC).


As long as avalon-components is designed to have a different
set of CVS privs, then +1.  If we are limiting it to Avalon
developers, then -1.  We should only use different CVS repositories
when there are different permissions involved.

I think it is important to separate container/framework and
components.  I also think that we should use Scratchpad/Components
like Jakarta Commons.  I.e.: Any Apache committer should have
Karma for the Scratchpad CVS.  The ones actively maintaining
the component code shoul be granted karma to Component.

* That means that *anyone* can do scratchpad stuff.
* It also means that someone who is maintaining components is not
  necessarily an Avalon committer.
* It also means that not just *anyone* can alter the released
  components--they have to demonstrate the ability to maintain it.
* Lastly, and most importantly, it means we have to be *really*
  careful about scope creep.

I think that Avalon Components should be *strictly* components.
No containers, no utility code, just components.  Scratchpad can
be used as a breeding ground for new ideas--but it does not
guarantee promotion to Avalon Components or Avalon proper.