Re: [PROPOSAL] lifecycle release
Stephen McConnell <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.jakarta.avalon.phoenix.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Peter Donald: I would like to apologize for the remarks I made below. As has been correctly pointed out to me by several of the members here, my reaction was inappropriate. Furthermore - as a member of this community I now regret making the remark as it is contradictory with the behavior that I expect from others. As such, I would like to extend this apology to the Avalon Community as well. Steve. Stephen McConnell wrote: > > > Peter Donald wrote: > >> On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 07:49, Berin Loritsch wrote: >> >> >>> Furthermore, the lifecycle package addresses a common need in both >>> Fortress and Merlin--alowing for a smooth migration path for users >>> as they upgrade their containers. >>> >> >> >> Then why not merge it into fortress? If Merlin is the successor of >> Fortress then that should be no problem. >> >> BTW I was not -1'ing a release (which is impossible) but that it be >> considered a "optional" extension to the framework contracts. It is a >> hack shared by fortress and Merlin >> > > Peter: > > I'm so glad your back! > > Knowing that day-to-day I have your considered remarks, insightful > comments and astute observations to look forward to - it gives me a > "warm and fluffy feeling" ... you know ... like pissing in a wetsuit. > If only you could dedicate more of your time to the same. Heck - the > whole world could be a warmer fluffier place and we would all have you > to thank for it. > > Cheers, Steve. > > ;-) > -- Stephen J. McConnell mailto:[email protected] http://www.osm.net