geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bruce Snyder" <>
Subject Re: Verbiage: Change "configuration" to "module"?
Date Fri, 21 Apr 2006 20:31:47 GMT
On 4/21/06, Aaron Mulder <> wrote:
> All,
> How would you feel about referring to configurations (e.g. a group of
> GBeans with own ID and classloader) as a "module" instead?  It seems
> like "configuration" can be confusing, as it more traditionally refers
> to a larger scope like an entire installation.  For example, if you
> say you have two different WebLogic configurations or two different
> Apache (HTTP) configurations, you're saying either you have two
> installations, or you have two totally separate product configurations
> available for the same product installation.  You're not saying you
> have an app and a database pool within one runtime, but that's what
> "two different configurations" presently would mean in relation to
> Geronimo.
> It seems like it would be clearer to say that a Geronimo installation
> loads many modules, and each module includes many components (GBeans).
> I'm not proposing that we go changing class names and stuff, but I'm
> proposing that we make a concerted effort in our documentation and
> presentations to present the name of the "unit with an ID and
> classloader holding many components" as a "module".
> What do you think?

Yay! +1

perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"

Apache Geronimo -
Apache ActiveMQ -
Apache ServiceMix -
Castor -

View raw message