On Tuesday, September 9, 2003, at 01:06 pm, Alex Blewitt wrote:
On Tuesday, Sep 9, 2003, at 10:56 Europe/London, James Strachan wrote:
What is the use case for having 'standard' beans separate from geronimo beans - on't we just need Geronimo beans? i.e. it seems very complex to have 2 separate trees of standard J2EE descriptors and another tree of geronimo-extended J2EE descriptor beans. This leads to a messy dual-inheritence hierarchy that Greg's brought up.
I don't think you need to worry about having two separate trees -- it's called the Bridge pattern. It's what the GUI AWT toolkit uses to present different flavours of widgets depending on OS.
You could set the bridge up so that Geronimo doesn't even have to care about what the types are (and/or generate delegation methods to their normal counterparts). Plus, it could then be extended to deal with other flavours, such as the WebSphere or Weblogic deployment descriptors at the same time.
Whoah. I know about bridges and the like. I'm asking *why* do we have to support any other deployment metadata other than Geronimo. e.g. why should the Geronimo project ever have to deal with non-Geronimo metadata. Lets figure out the use cases first before we dive off coding stuff we don't need.
James ------- http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
