On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 09:44:18 +0100, Siegfried Goeschl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The usage szenario would be : you find a few funky Fulcrum services but > they depend on a Merlin Avalon contract regarding the Context. If I > understand it correctly you can't use the components directly since the > blow up during contextialize() trying to access "urn:avalon:home" and > "urn:avalon:temp". First off, we (Excalibur) need to fix up the context contracts. It should be much easier now that Avalon has disolved. If nothing else, we could look at having Fortress handle all previous context "standards". > We have the same requirement for Turbine - if the Turbine service > framework does not find a service it should ask all its children > implementing ServiceManager. In this case it is not a big deal since > this is the only sensible solution to provide container-transparent > access to components. But in Excalibur land it has a rather akward semantic. Sounds like it would involve a change to the default ServiceManager or a new ServiceManager implementation. Siegfried, what was the original motivation for YAAFI? Was it the existance of multiple Avalon containers? Was it the number of jar dependencies? Is YAAFI intended to be used in a production environment? I'd like to see Fortress evolve to be simple enough that there wouldn't be a need for Yet Another Avalon Framework Implementation. Maybe Turbine's needs can help drive that. -- jaaron --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
