Sean,
firstly let's not escalate this into a "flame war" status just yet. People can have different views of a problem and it's solution and express them rather strongly without it being a war.
I believe that we should be using 77 to manage the application and the container. It makes little sense to me to have different lifecycles etc. But the point at hand is a little bit below 77 at the moment - it is how we organize our fundamental components... which just so happen to use 77 APIs so that they can be 77 manageable once they are created.
cheers
Sean Hamblett wrote:
On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 12:29:11 -0500
Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 20, 2003, at 02:25 AM, Greg Wilkins wrote:
I think we all agree that we are implementing 77, but I don't think we all have the same definition of 77. I understand 77 to be about the Application management, ie the manaegement of a deployed J2EE Application, and all of its parts (encapsulated within the ear). What I am hearing is 77 is about Application management, the Geronimo Application and all if its parts. If I am wrong let me know, but to help us work together I think we need to agree on what 77 means to us before we get in a flame war over different definitions of the same spec.
Regards,
Sean
