[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAMAYA-77?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14512755#comment-14512755
]
Anatole Tresch commented on TAMAYA-77:
--------------------------------------
1) normally I don't see need for different impls, but I am not sure on that.
2) Since building a configuration using a builder is an API use case, removing
it from the API might not make sense. You have to separate lifecycle questions
from the API discussion. These are 2 different aspects not be messed up IMO ;)
> Clearify the usage of the ConfigurationContextBuilder
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TAMAYA-77
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAMAYA-77
> Project: Tamaya
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Core
> Affects Versions: 0.1-incubating
> Reporter: Oliver B. Fischer
> Labels: spi
> Fix For: 0.1-incubating
>
>
> This issue is a reminder to discuss the usage of the
> ConfigururationContextBuilder.
> While analyzing our service providers I recognized that the
> {{DefaultConfigurationContextBuilder}} is not treated like a service
> provider. Instead of accessing it via the usual SPI meachnism simply a new
> instance is created. Furthermore {{DefaultConfigurationContextBuilder}} is
> the only implementation of {{ConfigurationContextBuilder}}.
> We should discuss:
> - could be there more than one implementation of
> {{ConfigurationContextBuilder}}?
> - If no, can we remove the {{ConfigurationContextBuilder}} interface from our
> API?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
