river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dennis Reedy <dennis.re...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: river.jar
Date Sat, 01 Jan 2011 16:06:27 GMT
IMHO, if you provide reasonable conventions on how to build and deploy services that use River
you dont need to clutter the distribution with options that will ultimately lead to confusion
down the stretch. 

BTW, happy new year to all, I hope 2011 offers all opportunities for success.

Dennis

On Dec 31, 2010, at 1211PM, Sim IJskes - QCG wrote:

> On 31-12-10 17:18, trasukg@trasuk.com wrote:
>> Isn't that already jsk-platform.jar?  I would object to anything that
>> subverts the dynamic proxy loading concept that is central to Jini.
>> 
>> It is imperative that people don't, for instance, get the
>> service-registrar proxy impls in their local class path.  That would
>> break compatibility with future or alternate impls.
> 
> If it would be easier for people to work with river, why would we be against it. It is
about offering people options, not about forcing people to use a certain concept. I do think
to use the word 'subverting' is indicating a strong tendency to force people to use a certain
piece of software in the way you think they should. I think this is way too directive.
> 
> Gr. Sim


Mime
View raw message