From: Trans Date: 2005-10-29T15:07:05+09:00 Subject: Re: Facets 2005-10-30 Kirk Haines wrote: > On Friday 28 October 2005 5:57 pm, gabriele renzi wrote: > > > AFAIR in most new releases there was a major change (naming scheme for > > methods, require logic, module names etc). > > > > I'm not trying to say you did not put reasoning behind this, but > > somewhat I got the feeling that the whole thing seems fragile and non > > dependable (is this a word?). > > These are reasons why, despite there being some things in Facets that are > quite similar to some code that I use, and despite me having some code that > might make sense as part of Facets, I have been very reluctant to use it or > contribute anything to it. It seems like I'd be creating a lot more work for > myself to do so, right now. I may well be wrong about that, but that's the > impression that I have. While I understand, I think maybe the concern is a bit over drawn. Yes, there some transition going on right now with how requiring is done. And in genreal Facets is still young so some things are still getting settled. Using a young piece of software (especially one as vast as Facets) means keeping pace with a more rapid growth until the software matures. That's too be expected. But if your just starting to use Facets, you have much less to worry about --there will be one more significant transition with the next release which will add built in versioning. But even then that won't be as significant a change as this realease. And from there it's all downhill, only getting more and more stable as time goes on. T.