> -----Original Message----- > From: Carsten Ziegeler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Just one question: I guess fortress is currently neither supporting > the standard context entries nor all required meta tags. So these > changes would make the components unusable with Fortress (ECM), right?
Yes, Fortress has its own set of standard context entries [1] (different from Merlin) and uses a different set of meta-tags (though similar in some respects). <context type="historical"> This is the whole point of unifying our container effort and standardizing somewhere. There never was a standard for context entries. There never was a standard for meta-tags. These are the 'holes' in the framework, so to speak. Each container solved them differently. Previously, whenever this has been brought up, biases based on container preference causes offense when someone says, "Hey, let's all adopt Merlin's standards." Someone will inevitably point out, "Well, why Merlin? Why not Fortress/Phoenix/MyNewSpecification?" </context> So, this issue really cuts to the core of why the situation is less than optimal (excalibur components don't run in merlin) and why we need to agree on a more complete architecture. > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Multipart response ... ECM meta is collected in roles files together > with the master configuration so any changes to tags in sources will not > effect ECM. Fortress uses specific meta that *could* be generated from > standard meta-info, but it my impression that this is an optional > requirement as I believe you can still declare meta manually via roles > files in Fortress. Fortress can use "role" files or meta-info. I know a lot of people still use the role files with Fortress (I do). J. Aaron Farr SONY ELECTRONICS DDP-CIM (724) 696-7653 [1] http://wiki.apache.org/avalon/AvalonContextSurvey --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
