Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 38640 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2004 19:53:26 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Apr 2004 19:53:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 34267 invoked by uid 500); 2 Apr 2004 19:53:13 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 34208 invoked by uid 500); 2 Apr 2004 19:53:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 34183 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2004 19:53:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailout03.sul.t-online.com) (194.25.134.81) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Apr 2004 19:53:12 -0000 Received: from fwd10.aul.t-online.de by mailout03.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 1B9Uj6-0007LU-06; Fri, 02 Apr 2004 21:53:16 +0200 Received: from t-online.de (ZBu6nUZDYeppTgiIWqgzteMBsCfOmj7iVuXCdUCIkXgcltxdx09j0m@[217.84.177.174]) by fwd10.sul.t-online.com with esmtp id 1B9Uiu-01wzWC0; Fri, 2 Apr 2004 21:53:04 +0200 Message-ID: <406DC4A7.5020805@t-online.de> Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 21:53:11 +0200 From: Oliver.Heger@t-online.de (Oliver Heger) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [configuration]Release 1 and hierarchical configurations References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Seen: false X-ID: ZBu6nUZDYeppTgiIWqgzteMBsCfOmj7iVuXCdUCIkXgcltxdx09j0m X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Well, knowing that the results will be even more horrible I am not really motivated to do that. Such a hack would have to check a bunch of cases, e.g. a SubsetConfiguration wrapping a HierarchicalConfiguration, a CompositeConfiguration containing a HierarchicalConfiguration and more. Another point is that the affected classes are probably not used yet, so we won't really loose anything. And I surely don't want to block the release. Oliver Eric Pugh wrote: >Oliver, > >While I think it is very kind of you to offer to drop the code for 1.0, and >it may be the right think, what about putting in some sort of temporary hack >for 1.0? Is there some sort of maybe private/special method like >getHackConfigurationXMLDoucment or maybe some sort of usage of instanceof >that we document as crummy but good enough? Then, this would give us an >example of what to rearchitect? We get it to pass the unit tests, cut 1.0, >and then remove the hack so that the unit tests bug us to fix the problem? > >Comments? > >Eric > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Oliver Heger [mailto:Oliver.Heger@t-online.de] >>Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 8:39 PM >>To: Jakarta Commons Developer List >>Subject: [configuration]Release 1 and hierarchical configurations >> >> >>There is still the problem that the ConfigurationXMLDocument class is >>not fully compatible with SubsetConfiguration. I don't think that a >>quick and clean solution can be found for this problem soon, so I would >>like to suggest to drop this class and some of its helpers from the 1.0 >>release. The following files are affected: >> >>- ConfigurationXMLDocument.java and its test class >>TestConfigurationXMLDocument.java. >>- The three classes ending on XMLReader. Two of them have also >>test classes. >>- In the XML howto document the last section starting with "XML >>processing" must be removed. >>- In the conf directory testConfigurationXMLDocument.xml becomes obsolete. >> >>In another thread it was mentioned that in future the inherent >>hierarchical aspects of configuration sources should be more regarded. >>So I hope that it will be quite easy to re-introduce these classes later >>with a cleaner design. >> >>I was thinking a bit about those hierarchical aspects and how to provide >>access to them through the Configuration interface. My idea was to >>introduce an interface like ConfigurationNode that describes a node in a >>configuration tree. It could look similar to the >>HierarchicalProperties.Node class. Then a method getRoot() could be >>added to Configuration that returns the root node of the configuration >>tree thus providing a tree like view on a configuration. (By the way, >>there is already a class HierarchicalConfigurationConverter, which >>provides means to convert a flat configuration into a hierarchical one.) >> >>If we had such a tree like view on a configuration, there could be >>different "expression language engines" operating on the trees, e.g. for >>XPath or other query languages. This would be a powerful way of querying >>properties. >> >>Oliver >> >> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org >>For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org >> >> > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org >For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org