Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 76179 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2007 22:52:56 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Dec 2007 22:52:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 62160 invoked by uid 500); 18 Dec 2007 22:52:38 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 62109 invoked by uid 500); 18 Dec 2007 22:52:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 62093 invoked by uid 99); 18 Dec 2007 22:52:38 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:52:38 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [64.97.136.132] (HELO n082.sc1.he.tucows.com) (64.97.136.132) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:52:14 +0000 Received: from sc1-out03.emaildefenseservice.com (64.97.139.2) by n082.sc1.he.tucows.com (7.2.069.1) id 4761AF93000B38C9 for dev@tomcat.apache.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:52:15 +0000 X-SpamScore: 2 X-Spamcatcher-Summary: 2,0,0,46588b2dc11d684b,eba652d64155f439,markt@apache.org,-,RULES_HIT:355:379:599:601:854:945:967:973:988:989:1187:1260:1261:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1358:1359:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1538:1593:1594:1711:1714:1730:1747:1766:1792:2393:2525:2553:2559:2563:2682:2685:2828:2857:2859:2933:2937:2939:2942:2945:2947:2951:2954:3022:3027:3350:3865:3866:3867:3868:3869:3870:3873:3874:3934:3936:3938:3941:3944:4250:5007:7652:7679,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5, 0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:,MSBL:none,DNSBL:none X-Spamcatcher-Explanation: Received: from [192.168.0.100] (unknown [64.97.206.40]) (Authenticated sender: med.thomas) by sc1-out03.emaildefenseservice.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:52:14 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <47684F1F.7060408@apache.org> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:52:15 +0000 From: Mark Thomas User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Re: trunk development References: <4762DF38.7080901@hanik.com> <47683E61.3040002@apache.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org David Jencks wrote: > On Dec 18, 2007, at 1:40 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: >> Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote: >>> 1. annotation dependency injection patch >> How does this compare to >> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43819 ? > > I don't see any relationship or overlap between EL and > annotations/dependency injection. What did you have in mind? Nothing concrete. Just the similarity that they both allow the use of alternative implementations. I guess I was thinking along the lines of doing things in a similar/consistent way. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org