>That's not true. AFAIK, every mutable property in >org.apache.commons.pool.impl.* follows the getProperty/setProperty >conventions, and always have.
Another important piece of the conventions is that all beans have a zero-arg constructor, which the core pool classes don't have. As I said, it was a while ago, and I am not deeply familiar with the APIs. The more complicated issue was having one digester process handle the separate variability which is supported by DBCP and pool, which you discuss in your post cited below... It seems like a good case for namespaces and Digester RuleSets, but I couldn't get my head around how to declaratively make sure the references between the layers could resolve, and since I was building a demo, I didn't need pooling for performance, so I let it slide... Joe > > As it's designed now (or as it was a month ago), pool >> and DBCP are not very Digester friendly. > >There is some mismatch between digester and dbcp. I discussed some of the >issues in some detail at >http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg04344.html. -- -- * Joe Germuska { [EMAIL PROTECTED] } "It's pitiful, sometimes, if they've got it bad. Their eyes get glazed, they go white, their hands tremble.... As I watch them I often feel that a dope peddler is a gentleman compared with the man who sells records." --Sam Goody, 1956 tune in posse radio: <http://www.live365.com/stations/289268> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
