Alex Karasulu wrote:
Steve,
Are there any foreseeable problems with using the DefaultKernel in the base
unit test case? I have been looking at the same code for a while: the
DefaultEmbeddableKernel and the DefaultKernel code. I'm wondering what the
reasons where that compelled you to implement a unit test specific Kernel.
There must have been some reason for this that I'm missing. Could you
elaborate?
Yep.
Maven puts everything into the classloader that is supplied to the test case. I wanted to totally isolate the kernel from Maven with the exception of API and client classes. I.e. real component/container seperation. The way I achieved that was to execute the kernel in a seperate thread and assign a clean classloader hierachy to the thread. This means that the kernel is running with only the kernel content and deploying components based on pure block directives. The test cases pull in service as needed. I.e. no classloader conflicts between Merlin and Maven.
Steve.
I'm just trying to figure things out a bit more in depth before making changes. Please excuse the volume of questions.
Alex
--
Stephen J. McConnell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
