river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Brouwer <mark.brou...@cheiron.org>
Subject Re: Drowning in the River
Date Wed, 07 Feb 2007 10:32:12 GMT
Greg Trasuk wrote:

> Is there anything preventing someone from writing another implementation
> of Configuration as an alternative to ConfigurationFile?  I though Van

FYI I haven't found any problems in configuring any classes that take a
Configuration object based on configuration files that are XML based
combined with programmatic assembling at runtime (vague enough?).

I've always been very pleased with the current separation, I can imagine
though that for many people the indirection level is confusing or
awkward or whatever. However nothing prevents people for creating
Configuration factories for any of the JTSK classes that expose the
implementation details in a different way such as with setters.

The great thing is that this can be done in way that doesn't affect the
standardized/core/platform/kernel/<fill in your metaphor> classes. I can
see there are people who want to go wild with this and is Apache River a
good place for this? I think so, but IMHO not as part of the same
subproject as the <fill in your metaphor> classes.
-- 
Mark

Mime
View raw message