avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Berin Loritsch <blorit...@apache.org>
Subject Re: KISS (was Re: [RT] semantic conflict - poolable)
Date Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:41:50 GMT
Stephen McConnell wrote:

> Berin Loritsch wrote:
> 
>>> I don't agreed with the "deployment" == "lifestyle" assumption - but 
>>> more on that in line.
>>
>> I'm the one who created the definition for the word, as I am the one 
>> who first
>> used it in Avalon contexts.  How can it not be what I defined it to 
>> be?  Help
>> me understand how that could work. 
> 
> Ummm, maybe because the term is put onto the table without sufficient 
> defintion?
> :-)

At the time, there was no need for further definition.  It was defined
sufficiently when I originally wrote the white paper to convey the concept
at hand.

>>> Berin Loritsch wrote:
>>>
>>> The terminology that I understand ...
>>>
>>> * "lifestyle" is a set of policies controlling component
>>>   creation and destruction
>>
>> Hmmm.  Lifestyle == deployment strategy.  You understand incorrectly. 
> 
> Deployment and management are two different things.  A decision to 
> deploy a new component is something done by a lifestyle handler.  The 
> deployment of a new instance is a seperate and distinct concern that 
> requires no "lifestyle" info.  I.e. "lifestyle" != deployment strategy, 
> instead - "lifestyle" == management strategy.

I think we are talking in circles here because we are using certain words
which to us mean different things.  If you are saying that Lifestyle
encapsulates the rules of deciding when to deploy and undeploy a component,
then we are in agreement (apparently violently in agreement ;P )  If not,
then I am not sure exactly what you are getting at.  Perhaps an explanation
that puts it on a third grade reading level (if possible) would help us all
understand exactly what is being said.

>>> * "deployment" - the act of taking a component though its
>>>   "lifecycle" to an established state
>>
>> Ok, but that does not address the issue of *strategy*.
> 
> I need to expand *strategy* - are you referring to:
> 
> * a deployment strategy as in classic Avalon lifecycle versus a servlet 
> lifecycle?

I'm not sure what the difference is here.

> * a management strategy as in pooled verus singleton?

Essentially this is what I am getting at.

> * a stage handling strategy as in a custom contextulization interface?

This is an implementation detail.  Too fine grained to be a good contract
for this topic.

> 
> AFAIAC - *deployment* is the execution of a lifecycle strategy.

I think we are talking at cross purposes here.  It seems as if we don't
agree on the definition of the phrase "lifecycle strategy", so it is hard
for me to say yes or no.  Perhaps a definition that doesn't refer to the
words "deployment", "lifecycle", or "strategy" would put us on the same
page.

I get the feeling of having recursive definitions kind of like the pair
below:

Stuff -- the junk you keep.
Junk -- the stuff you throw away.

>>> * "stage" a step in deployment lifecycle that may implemented using a
>>>   specific strategy
>>
>> Just drop the phrase "that may implemented using a specific strategy"
>> and you've got it.  THe extra phrase does not add anything relevant to
>> the definition and it is bad grammer.  ("that may BE"). 
> 
> :-)
> 
> But a stage *is* implemented using a particular strategy - normally that 
> styrategy is the Avalon classic - but it may be something different.

"Lifecycle" already encapsulates that thought.  That is why I am saying that
the extra phrase doesn't lend anything relevant here.

>>> At the end of the day I think we are in sync. When you using the term 
>>> lifestyle you thinking "a type of lifestyle handler"- and I'm 
>>> thinking "a set of lifestyle policies".
>>
>> I believe I have already stated what I meant when I coined the term.
> 
> Comming up with a term does not constitute the establishment of a 
> specification.
> 
> ;-)

It never was a specification.  However, I think the person who coined a
phrase knows best what they meant by it.  So if the idea conveyed is not
right, then the term is not right.  Adding new semantics or definitions
to an existing phrase or word only serves to add confusion.  If we need
to, we will come up with a better way to describe what you are talking about.
I just don't think that Lifestyle is really the word to use for it.

-- 

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
  deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                 - Benjamin Franklin


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


Mime
View raw message