On Friday 17 October 2003 07:19, Stephen McConnell wrote: > Declaration of a pool deployment > -------------------------------- > > <component name="thing" type="Whatever"> > <pool type="ResourceLimitingPool"> > <minimum>10</minimum> > <maximum>10</maximum> > <increment>10</increment> > </pool> > </component> > > And if the component lifestyle is not pooled, then the pool directives > would be ignored and an appropriate warning would be generated. > > Implications > ------------ > > 1. update avalon-meta @avalon.component tag to include collection and > distruction policies > 2. update Type definition to expose respective policies > 3. update avalon-composistion to include pool meta-data > 4. update avalon-composistion meta model to recognize pool meta-data > 5. update avalon-activation to support pooled service provider resolution
Why not worry about this at the same breath of "pluggable lifestyles", and that each lifestyle is provided an optional "fail-safe" (probably namespace aware) configuration section per component? Are we not at a juncture where it would make sense to start thinking of that, together with pluggable life cycles? Niclas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
