Correction ...
> -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, 03 March, 2002 21:15 > To: Avalon Developers List > Subject: RE: Excalibur service package > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Leo Sutic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Sunday, 03 March, 2002 19:36 > > To: Avalon Developers List > > Subject: RE: Excalibur service package > > > > > > > > > > > From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > > I would prefer an approach > > > where the service manager implementation could locate a pool > > > provider (handler) based on the type of object that is returned. > > > > Impossible. Consider a component, my.ComponentImpl, that implements > > my.Component and is pooled. > > > > Now consider the two roles my.Component/B and my.Component/A. > > > > Since the two roles have different configurations they are not > equivalent. > > I'm not providing support for configuration relative to roles. The > implementation is based on the Phoenix notion of roles where a role is a > name that is used by a component when invoking lookup on a manager. The > loader's responsibility here is to associate the service under > the supplied role name. What I said above is bit missleading - Phoenix provides support for association of block implementations with a named configuration via the information in the assembly.xml file. I'm still looking into how that can be achieved using default information so that the ability to run a component/object does not require additional info beyond a default configuration bound to the implementation (but enabling the overrided of default values at site level as required). Cheers, Steve. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>