On Wed, 12 Jun 2002 11:50, Stephen McConnell wrote:
> 2. the concern related to ECM
>
> ECM uses the role name together with some implementation
> magic to support resolution of services exposed under the
> component manager interface. In this context, the association
> of an interface name as a key value is consistent with the
> design of ECM.
And phoenix. ie It is less work to comply with this than it is not to comply
and all of cornerstone and friends comply with it. If you comply then you
need not define <role> elements and your .xinfo files are cut by a third.
I am not saying it should always be enforced but it can be recomended. ie I
have been asked in the past to put in a check. For every role string do
something like
int index = role.indexOf( '/' );
if( -1 != index )
{
role = role.substring( 0, index );
}
if( role != interfaceName )
{
issueWarning();
}
I consider it valid best practice in any container. It need not be enforced
but it is good to do. If you remember I asked you why you did not do this
with enterprise stuff because people had emailed me asking why the -apps CVS
did not live up to what we/I recomended ;)
So I think it is good practice that the rolename is serviceClazz.getName(),
optionally with a "selector" on end like "/ssl".
> p.s. sins concerning metainfo back-pointers are forgiven
> - a solution has emerged :-)
aww, sinners get more lasses.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
------------------------------------------------------------
militant agnostic: i don't know, and you don't know either.
------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
