Jon Stevens wrote:
> I can't wait to see what it will be like to configure all these Commons
> components and how many .xml files I will have to edit or how much
> configuration code I will have to write to make it work...
The subtext of the project is definitely "how can we create independent
packages that can be a seamless part of larger products". That's no
small task, but I don't believe Jakarta should shirk from a challenge
;-)
There does seem to be an obnoxious number of guidelines, but most are
really just best practices statements, like:
"8. Packages are encouraged to either use JavaBeans as core objects, a
JavaBean-style API, or to provide an optional JavaBean wrapper."
and
"9. External configuration files are discouraged, but if required, XML
format files are preferred for configuration options."
In practice, I think most of the packages will rely on (8), and then use
(9) for test programs.
A larger product would read configuration parameters from its own
configuration file, and then use (8) to setup the package. Which is
probably very close to whatever a product is doing now.
Once we have some code out the door, the Guidelines section of the
Charter should definitely be refactored. Right now they are a
hodge-podge of requirements, best practices, and actual voting
guidelines. But we wanted to move things along.
I am aware of at least three serious Commons proposals now in the works;
check-ins are imminent.
-- Ted Husted, Husted dot Com, Fairport NY USA.
-- Custom Software ~ Technical Services.
-- Tel 716 737-3463.
-- http://www.husted.com/about/struts/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
