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: federation
Date Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:35:14 GMT
Hi Simon,

Not sure I follow. My comment was simply stating that from my experience developers are less
interested in annotations that support configuration then annotations that support lifecycle.
Providing acceptable defaults for things like exporters allow developers to get up & running
easier (and I thought that was the whole purpose behind your effort) allows that.



On Sep 25, 2012, at 821AM, Simon IJskes - QCG wrote:

> On 25-09-12 12:46, Dennis Reedy wrote:
>> Certainly getting a service "working" is important, but wouldn't providing acceptable
defaults be easier?
> And if you want to deviate from the default, for a very small part of the services, how
would you implement this? Provide a annotation reference to a Configuration component name,
allow Configuration to introspect for specific deviations?
> -- 
> QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl
> Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397

View raw message