On Wednesday 07 January 2004 00:15, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
Sorry Berin, I think you missed the target - Why do it in the first place?
Typo...
Sorry Berin, I think you missed the target - Why do I need it in the first place?
Sometimes new features need new meta info to help fine tune those features. For instance, dynamic generation of intrumentation points, or JMX control points. It would be easier to handle these with a less strict meta model than the one under the Meta system.
(copied form other email).
Also, to make things like Avalon PI a reality, we need something that is flexible enough to handle non-Avalon specific attributes.
The major reason for it though is to make the development of plug-ins or enhancements to the container architecture easier. It is not necessarily something that would benifit the core system immediately--but something that will benefit others in the future. By forcing hard and inflexible object models that are concrete and not alterable, you lose out on a whole host of other enhancements that don't fit that model.
The current model feels like I am painted into a corner--and it is difficult to merge into Fortress which makes it hard to upgrade it. Whereas the more flexible Attributes package will fit both environments pretty well.
One is custom made for Merlin, while the other allows for a wider variety of environments.
--
"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]
