Hi Simon, Not sure I follow. My comment was simply stating that from my experience developers are less interested in annotations that support configuration then annotations that support lifecycle. Providing acceptable defaults for things like exporters allow developers to get up & running easier (and I thought that was the whole purpose behind your effort) allows that.
Regards Dennis On Sep 25, 2012, at 821AM, Simon IJskes - QCG wrote: > On 25-09-12 12:46, Dennis Reedy wrote: >> Certainly getting a service "working" is important, but wouldn't providing >> acceptable defaults be easier? > > And if you want to deviate from the default, for a very small part of the > services, how would you implement this? Provide a annotation reference to a > Configuration component name, allow Configuration to introspect for specific > deviations? > > -- > QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl > Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397
