Hello,

Ok I'm back - excuse the delayed response.

KernelConfig is good for me if it's good for you guys.


> >>> 1. I think KernelParameters should go into a seperate package that
> >>> other packages (such as kernel) depend on. This will make it easier
> >>> when creating the bootstrap process.
> >>

Just to clarify I don't think you Leo disagreed with the package that the config class 
was placed into right?  I thought you were just pointing out a preference for a 
KernelConfig object rather than the use of a general Map.


> >
> > disagree! Recognize the tight coupling between config and component 
> > and reflect it :D
> 

Ok I'm going to now look through leo's email regarding the use of xml instead of 
properties files.  I like this as well but what do you think about it Steve?

Should I just use both an xml configuration and a properties file representing xml 
path expressions in dot notation for the names of properties like so:

<foo>
  <bar>abc123</bar>
</foo>

foo.bar=abc123

<hit the breaks/>

Now keep in mind having to have an XML parser makes the size of the jar huge and we 
want to minimize the footprint.  Also the repo is not operational yet so we can't 
snarf it down.  I like the idea of XML but I'm afraid we have as situation where we 
are feature poor while bootstraping the repo and should stick to the use of properties 
files while handling (a).

> (a) establish parameters for repository bootstrap
> (b) build repository classloader
> (c) boostrap repository
> (d) load and bootstrap the kernel loader

Perhaps when a modern JDK with an XML parser is the de facto standard then we can go 
there but for now unfortunately we might have to go with property files.  Thoughts?

Cheers,
Alex

P.S. Just thinking out loud here.



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

Reply via email to