I don't see any harm or problem adding this interface to framework. No
container will crash, no users will shout in panic. A Reconfigurable
semantic is another issue that deserves another discussion.
By now, the addition of this interface seems ok.
Remember that a -1 is a VETO and that is IMO a bit radical position to take.
Putting something into framework is a lot more to do with the definition of the Avalon component lifecycle model. It really does not matter if the intention is to expose this during the lifecycle phases or not - the thing is that if it goes into framework it becomes part of framework.
The alternative is to put it into Excalibur Configuration along with the other configuration additions - such as:
- CascadingConfiguration - ConfigurationUtil, - NamingConfigurationBuilder - the config merger and split helpers - and the config validation stuff.
Stephen.
--
|------------------------------------------------| | Magic by Merlin | | Production by Avalon | | | | http://avalon.apache.org/merlin | | http://dpml.net/merlin/distributions/latest | |------------------------------------------------|
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
