avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <pe...@apache.org>
Subject RE: [ISSUE] containerkit
Date Wed, 03 Jul 2002 23:22:10 GMT
At 07:02 PM 7/3/2002 +0200, you wrote:
>So if we use two constraints:
>  + What interfaces the Context must implement (that is, to what
>    other type can you cast the aquired Context interface).
>  + What values must it have (that is, what are the keys to the
>    get() method), and what should the type of those values be.
>That's it as far as constraints are concerned. This we can standardize.

No problem there. After all I did write the ContextDescriptor to do just that.

>Now for Stephen's method of populating the Context via application
>profile, we can make that container specific.

I have no problem with that - it can't hurt me if it is container specific. 
Stephen however wants to force everyone else to adopt his model.

In summary: I don't think there's a problem with the constraint spec,
>as it allows one to describe all the possible uses of a Context that
>I have seen so far.

right. I think the ContextDescriptor is great - I wrote it so obviously I 
aint going to object to it.

For the container-specific parts (the container-specific configuration
>for the component), that will not affect any current usage of the
>Context, and need not be implemented.

The problem is Stephen wants add it to ComponentMetaData and thus force all 
containers to use a single method for constructing context - despite the 
fact that this wont work in any existing container except Merlin .... hmmm.


Peter Donald
"Faced with the choice between changing one's mind,
and proving that there is no need to do so - almost
everyone gets busy on the proof."
              - John Kenneth Galbraith

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>

View raw message