Peter Donald wrote:
>On Mon, 19 Aug 2002 18:35, Leo Simons wrote:
>
>
>>agreed. However, defining a container API that allows plugging of any
>>facility using an event- or pipeline- like architecture seems a nice
>>idea, and the current work to enable this is definately moving in the
>>right direction.
>>
>>
<snip>
>>Similarly, systems that completely expose their pipeline like Axis,
>>JEdit, to me show that it *is* possible to provide a common pluggability
>>architecture.
>>
>>
>
>As does cocoon, almost all enterprise/distributed servers (be they plain
>rmi-like servers to EJB/CORBA servers). Even TC3 and TC4 has the notion of
>interceptors. Now how many of them are actually compatible ...
>
>JEdit is a specific container, Axis is a specific container - have you got any
>examples apart from CORBA where there is a common API for extending servers?
>
>
>
>>conceptually, that would be okay. However, it is impossible to
>>anticipate in advance all the lifecycle phases important enough to
>>support.
>>
>>
>
>bingo!
>
I think you missing Leo's point. The need for extensions is brought
about by differences across domains, and the need to facilitate
adaption. This leads to more future-proof systems with better support
for variations in requirements across our user community. It's a point
that has been well and truly validated in the CORBA community.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
OSM SARL
digital products for a global economy
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.osm.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
