> Okay. It seems there is broad support for the
> changes. I believe this is the setup that has
> the most support:
>
> RuntimeException
> ^
> |
> CascadingRuntimeException // new
> ^
> |-- StartException // new
> |
> |-- StopException // new
> |
> |-- SuspendException // new
> |
> \-- ResumeException // new
+1
> Exception
> ^
> |
> CascadingException
> ^
> |-- ContextException <-- ContextualizationException // new; have both or
> have one...which one?
-1 for ContextException
+1 for ContextualizationException
> |
> |-- CompositionException // new
> |
> |-- ConfigurationException
> |
> \-- InitializationException // new
+1
> interface Startable { // better name, anyone?
> void start() throws StartException;
> void stop() throws StopException; // new
> }
+1
> interface Suspendable { // better name, anyone?
> void suspend() throws SuspendException;
> void resume() throws ResumeException; // new
> }
+1
> abstract class ClassImplementingAllLifecycleMethods implements
> Loggable
> Contexualizable,
> Composable, // name change
> Configurable
> Initializable
> Startable
> Runnable
> Suspendable
> Recontextualizable
> Recomposable
> Reconfigurable
> Disposable
> {
> void setLogger( Logger logger ); // does this need a different name?
> void contexualize( Context context ) throws
> ContextualizationException;
> void compose( ComponentManager cm ) throws CompositionException;
> void configure( Configuraion conf ) throws ConfigurationException;
> void initialize() throws InitializationException; // name change
> void start(); // might throw exception
> void run(); // doesn't throw exception
> void suspend(); // might throw exception
> void recontextualize( Context context ) throws
> ContextualizationException;
> void recompose( ComponentManager cm ) throws
> CompositionException;
> void reconfigure( Configuration conf ) throws
> ConfigurationException;
> void resume(); // might throw exception
> void stop(); // might throw exception
> void dispose(); // doesn't throw exception
> }
>
> any other suggestions/ -1s?
Looks good!
> cheers,
>
> LSD, who is now sure nobody on this list cares about versioning
> so will start bugging said list about it when neccessary
What was the reason for odd version signifying beta as distict from
1.2a (means alpha), 1.2b (means beta), or 7.5 (means released).
What was suggested did not seem intuative to me.
Cheers, Steve.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
