> From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Leo Simons > > What is a lifecycle extension? > > It is the concept > > "(1) I have here this interface, which exposes some methods > that are to > be called somewhere in the lifecycle of a component in a well-defined > manner." > > it is not > > "(2) I also have some code here which can do the management > of this part of the lifecycle on behalf of the container." > > though that is extremely useful too. OK, so (1) is from the component's side (i.e. a request for the container to do something with/to the component), and (2) is from the container's side (i.e. the code that will do that something).
Then, all stages of a component's usual lifecycle - Configurable, etc. - can be realized as lifecycle extensions. So this is a meta-model of the lifecycle. Right? Then, why doesn't the meta-model belong with the model? If lifecycle extensions are made framework-scoped instead of container specific, then you can use one package for AltRMI remoting in all containers, you can use one package for instrumentation in all containers, etc. etc.... /LS --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
