Peter Donald wrote:
Exactly what I thought. I preferred to use this Context instead of the ServletContext because it's about something that uses Avalon; the fact that it does not extend the Avalon Context though is another indication of something that's not really ok.On Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:38, Darrell DeBoer wrote:I'm not sure that this is a great example. The MailetContext shares little in common with the Avalon Context, other than a name. It's the way that a MailetContainer (potentially very different from an Avalon Container) provides contextual information to a Mailet, which is a domain-specific component running in a well-defined environment.
That pretty much defines the purpose of Avalons context ;)
ie Take the ServletContext and remove configuration mechanisms (or Configuration/Parameters in Avaloon terms) and service provision mechanisms (or ServiceManager/ComponentManager in Avalon terms) and you are left with what should remain in the context.
Leo Simons wrote:
> Apples 'n pears if you ask me.
>
> The JAMES MailetContext is not intimately related to the
> avalon Context
> at all. The MailetContext is used in a well-defined problem domain
> (e-mail; mailets), the avalon context is way more generic.
So, how do we put this?
It's evident to me that there is some kind of miosmatch here between avalon devs them selves, and also avalon devs and users.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
