Re: [picocontainer-dev] Pico2 releasing it ... before starting work on Composer 1.0

Michael Rimov wrote:
>> Can we aim at releasing Pico2 more or less as is?
> 
> Before I think one thing we should add back into the Pico and Mutable Pico are
> the old function names registerComponentInstance, etc etc etc and have them
> marked deprecated (with javadoc pointing to the new method name)
> 
> It should help people migrating a great deal.  

Could do - but as there is no backward compatibility between 1.x and 
2.x, in the medium to longer term it could prove more of a hindrance 
than a help.  Keeping deprecated methods is not an ideal solution IMO.

I would see more useful a clearly documented migration guide, that users 
would have to do just once.

>> And start Composer 1.0 with the Plexus people at Apache, bringing in
>> the remaining features, and reapplying the wisdom from Konstantin's
>> branch ?
>>
>> Thoughts?
> 
> I feel more comfortable doing this with Pico than the additional components
> above Nano.  (ie NanoWAR, Deployer, etc)
> 
> Perhaps we could do a release and while the container is being hashed out for
> Composer, additional work could be done on Nano and the higher level components?
> (Rather than tying them into a single big release cycle)
>

Yes - that is the intention.  We only release Pico2 core and gems - most 
of which are intended to form the core of composer (removing possibly 
things like JMX and JDNI).  All the Nano components need a fresh look, 
especially in the light of Plexus components that will surely present 
overlaps.

So, as I've not heard any objections, I'll push out a RC in the next 
couple of days.

Cheers


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email