Farr, Aaron wrote:


-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 12:20 PM
To: Avalon Developers List
Subject: Re: [ANTI-VOTE] Lifecycle Extension Tags



<snip/>

Summary:
--------

* moving out of core means death to the idea of reliable deployment
across containers


I was going to mention this in another post, but I wanted to see your
response first.

So given what Berin mentioned:


Right.  It is my position that we should manage these things in unieque
namespaces for function points.  That way they can be free to explore
things, and developers will be aware that only containers which advertise
support for the namespace they are using will be able to run their
components.


So the question comes down to this:

If I'm a clueless user and I attempt to deploy a component which uses
lifecycle extensions in a container which does not support it, what happens?
Does the container gracefully refuse to deploy the component or does it
deploy it regardless?

I think this is the difference between acknowledging but not supporting a
meta-tag and simply ignoring it.

If I understand Stephen's position it is that using the @lifecycle namespace
vs the @avalon namespace implicitly states that containers (that is
container developers) can ignore it.  This then causes the cross-container
deployment issues which he is apparently so concerned about.  Please correct
me if I'm wrong.

If this is Stephen's whole position, may I clarify it this way:


The vote is only for the namespace.  All containers must be able to recognize
the namespace and react accorndingly until such time as we have a workable
container extension mechanism so that these issues can be properly addressed
through that mechanism.


I don't mind the @lifecycle name itself, but I think it's important we clarify whether all containers recognize it or not, ie- even if Phoenix doesn't support it, what happens if I try to use it in the Phoenix environment?

In this case, Phoenix would be able to recognize the components as requiring functionality it can't deliver, and then refuse to deploy it. This addresses both Stephen's and my concerns.



--

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
 deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                - Benjamin Franklin


--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to