Peter Donald wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 03:49, Stephen McConnell wrote:
* that the package be migrated from the avalon-sandbox CVS to the avalon CVS as a separate project along-side the avalon framework
-1 as it does not belong at same level as framework.
Pete:
Given the interfaces in the Avalon framework and there to provide the patterns and contracts of interaction between a component and a container, and given that this is not proposed as part of the framework - but simply as the interfaces defining contract extension, could you perhaps illuminate us as to where you believe the package fits and the reasons for your assertion.
* the release of the avalon-lifecycle package shall be
considered as an "optional" extension to the framework
contracts
-1
Shall I presume that you -1 is that the extensions should not be considered optional? In which case can I assume that you would prefer that this is a mandatory requirement on containers? If so, I would just like to not my personal appreciation for you change in heart. It's encouraging to see you take a positive attitude to the development of others. Even so, I still this should remain an optional requirement with respect to containment compliance.
It is the same approach that has been done before and failed and can't cleanly produce some aspects like delayed activation, passivation, persistence, transaction demarcation, bifuricating interception etc.
Could you please expand on the point you raised above. My own experience has shown that the interfaces are sufficiently general to provide solutions to several of the above areas. Perhaps you are confusing the current work with something that was done before (that I am not aware of). I'm finding it difficult to understand why a component provided support for some aspect of a lifecycle can be implemented using the interfaces in question. Is there, in your opinion, some characteristic of the interfaces that inhibit implementation of any of the above - or were these just random examples?
I would be really interested in your reply because I'm currently using extensions across several areas you mentioned and finding the overall approach *really* functional. Obviously, I must be doing something wrong.
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.osm.net
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
