geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Strachan <>
Subject Re: Volunteers - Topics AND Configuration
Date Tue, 12 Aug 2003 18:11:29 GMT
FWIW shouldn't components and services be configured by the container - 
rather than the components being dependent on some arbitrary Config 

i.e. inversion of control should apply to configuration as well. The 
container should do all of that and the component developer shouldn't 
need to know how to do it or have any special APIs to worry about etc.

Then whether JNDI, MLETs, config files or whatnot were used by the 
container to configure components - that would be the containers 
choice. Component developers wouldn't have to worry about it.

(The only thing a component developer may wish to do is validate its 
configuration at some point in the lifecycle - such as throwing an 
exception if a dependency hasn't been set yet - it shouldn't need to 
pull its configuration data out of some container-specific API).

On Tuesday, August 12, 2003, at 06:41  pm, Henri Yandell wrote:

> I think they should be separate. The Configuration code will [I hope] 
> be
> users of the JNDI code. It's something I've found myself tending 
> towards.
> A JNDI implementation, but I often write a simple Config class around 
> that
> JNDI back end. Simple things like:
> getAsString
> getAsInteger
> getAsFile
> etc etc, which keeps the code using the configuration a bit cleaner. 
> More
> importantly, they are separated.
> My belief is that other parts of the system using the Configuration 
> should
> do so through an interface. etc etc, OO OO, polywossism usw.
> Hen
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2003, Sean Hamblett wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I am interested in Configuration, is that considered part
>> of JNDI, or has that yet to be established as its own
>> topic?  Oh yeah, a little about me, Java/J2EE Developer 3
>> years with a couple years of C/C++ prior.
>> Regards,
>> Sean


View raw message