cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Giacomo Pati <>
Subject Re: [RT] Simplifying component handling
Date Tue, 03 Jan 2006 10:28:52 GMT
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 3 Jan 2006, Sylvain Wallez wrote:

> Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 10:13:33 +0100
> From: Sylvain Wallez <>
> Reply-To:
> To:
> Subject: Re: [RT] Simplifying component handling
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>  So I'm coming back to my idea, is anyone against adding constructor
>>  injection to ECM++ or at least make it pluggable so I can add it for my
>>  own projects? The change adds only a feature while maintaining 100%
>>  compatibility.
> I have strong reservations about components using a mixed model (i.e. 
> dependency injection + Avalon interfaces), as these components will look as 
> "semi-POJOs" that bring some potential confusion about their lifecycle:
> - is the component ready after the constructor has been called?
> - what is the call order between setter-based injection and Avalon lifecycle 
> interfaces?
> - what is the lifestyle of a POJO: thread safe, single threaded?
> So although I'm all for a simplification of components and moving away from 
> Avalon, I'm strongly against using mixed models.
> Now, do we need to make changes to ECM++ at all? Cocoon 2.2 allows the 
> integration of other containers such as Spring (Carsten, _you_ wrote that!), 
> so we just have to *use* what is already there, using a solid existing 
> container rather than a half-baked solution.

I'm with Sylvain's and Gianugo's oppinion. I also see users getting 
confused with multiple choices of "how to write a component". I'd say in 
this area we need a revolution instead of an evolution.

Maybe we need a ECM+++ to still keep our fingers on the container.

- -- 
Giacomo Pati
Otego AG, Switzerland -
Orixo, the XML business alliance -
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)


View raw message