Leo,

Right I kinda knew that. But I guess I was referring to the 
DefaultConfiguration sorry for the confusion.  I'm fine with
the interface addition btw and have wanted this feature for
some time.

+1 for the additions you propose.

Could you though answer the question with regard to the defualt
implementation?

Also there is a commons configuration subproject.  How much overlap
do we have here?  Can we consolidate efforts and code bases?  Do they
have a MutableConfiguration interface?

Alex

> 
> From: "Leo Sutic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2004/01/29 Thu AM 09:54:42 EST
> To: "'Avalon Developers List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] RE: MutableConfiguration
> 
> Alex,
> 
> there are no store semantics associated with the interface.
> 
> An implementation may store on a per-mutator basis, on
> a batch update basis or not at all.
> 
> Just as the Configuration interface doesn't imply any kind
> of persisten storage backing it, the MutableConfiguration
> interface doesn't either.
> 
> /LS
> 
> > From: Alex Karasulu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 


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

Reply via email to