[Framework-Team] Re: Re: Our attititude to Archetypes
ra at burningman.com
Tue Apr 11 22:26:11 UTC 2006
On Apr 11, 2006, at 3:07 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 20:33:43 +0100, Alec Mitchell
> <apm13 at columbia.edu> wrote:
>> I think much of the power of AT lies in how intertwined all its parts
>> are, and while there's a great deal of value there, I think there's a
>> high likelihood that componentizing it will become quite difficult as
>> we move deeper into the AT core.
> This is a good observation. Have we asked, however, what needs to
> be or even makes sense to be componentised?
> The reference engine is the obvious example, and possibly a
> relatively easy one (in principle, at least). Hmmm... what else?
> I guess the storage layer could use a refactor, but that we've
> known for a while.
> There are a lot of things that should be componentised but can't be
> unless CMF starts talking in interfaces. The FTI stuff, the setup
> stuff - all of that needs CMF interfaces that we can adapterise to.
CMF _does_ talk in interfaces. there are lots of z3 interfaces as of
1.6, GenericSetup requires them. there are even more in 2.0.
More information about the Framework-Team