Mailing-List: contact dev-help@avalon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Avalon Developers List" <dev@avalon.apache.org>
Message-ID: <3E4D5517.40401@bull-enterprises.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 14:44:07 -0600
From: Robert McIntosh <robert@bull-enterprises.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
 rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Avalon Developers List <dev@avalon.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Fortress/ECM handlers
References: <3E4CFDDC.1030807@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <3E4CFDDC.1030807@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

That is what I was afraid of. I was hoping that since I didn't have to 
implement Component, that I could get away from implementing ThreadSafe 
as well.

I have looked Fortress some, but not enough to know how to configure and 
use it just, but I hope to soon.

Thanks guys,
Robert

Berin Loritsch wrote:

> Robert McIntosh wrote:
>
> > well, it seems to be ignoring that. The log shows:
> >
> > DEBUG   10451   [system.r] (): looking up shorthand 
> business-object-service, returning 
> com.browsersoft.eq.bc.BusinessObjectService
> > DEBUG   10451   [system.c] (): Adding component 
> (com.browsersoft.eq.bc.BusinessObjectService = 
> com.browsersoft.eq.bc.BusinessObjectServiceImpl)
> > DEBUG   10451   [system.c] (): Attempting to get Handler for role 
> [com.browsersoft.eq.bc.BusinessObjectService]
> > DEBUG   10451   [system.c] (): Handler type = 
> org.apache.avalon.excalibur.component.DefaultComponentHandler
> >
> > I even tried setting the handler to 
> "org.apache.avalon.excalibur.component.ThreadSafeComponentHandler" 
> (instead of the Fortress one), as that is what shows up for the 
> Excalibur conn. pool. component that I'm also using. I also tried the 
> handler as a sub-tag instead of an attribute, but it ignored that.
> >
> > again, I'm using ExcaliburComponentManagerCreator and not Fortress 
> directly (if that makes a difference).
>
>
>
> Oh, that does make a difference.  Fortress creates and manages
> components, and manages their relationships.  ECM is a different
> beast altogether.  What you are doing is not using Fortress for
> those purposes, and using ECM instead.
>
> It would be better if you remained true to one or the other.  Don't
> mix and match as the behavior is not easily determined--and the config
> files are a bit different.  It would be better if you went all Fortress
> in the mid term.  However we are in the process of trying to handle
> a smooth transition.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
>


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