river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dan Creswell <...@dcrdev.demon.co.uk>
Subject Re: Drowning in the River
Date Wed, 07 Feb 2007 10:35:04 GMT
Mark Brouwer wrote:
> 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.

Yeah,  River could be a place for this but better scale and freedom
might be achieved by following a more Linux type model where people
maintain these projects whereever and when they get critical
mass/popular acclaim or whatever get merged or moved or whatever.


View raw message