On Friday 07 November 2003 19:27, Hamilton Verissimo de Oliveira (Engenharia - SPO) wrote:
> Hmmm.. I think that sounded a bit rude stay cool, I'm clearly not trying to be rude or whatever, sorry if I might have shocked you, it is just that I'm trying to convince you ;) I've failed (that's part of the game), I'll pay you a bier next time you come here. ;) > > So what is the difference from getting data from configuration file and > data > > from the storage (db, ldap or whatever) except that configuration could > > be > > seen as static final data. > > You answered your question. so you agree that component could have its own data (even if it is currently read-only). why refusing to get larger scope? > > > ok but that does not mean doing nothing and "waiting for the sun". > > And I didn't said that. What I say early was: look for plug-and-use > persistence strategies. Don't try to reinvent the wheel. I agree with reuse if possible and I agree that I could implement persistance using current avaiable library. Software is a constant cycle process, with perpetual reinvention of wheel. I dont want to have persistance inside component at any cost, but seeking for any matches to enhance the model/framework. Cheers --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
