On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Casper Bang <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Well my problem with configuration as found on the Java stack is > fairly generic and relates both to the lack of expressiveness as well > as the tendency to solve the same problem in many different ways yet > no real de-facto standard (hence the less is more). During development > an obscene amount of time is often spent with research, configuration > and deployment rather than actually programming the solution. > I am still puzzled about the fact that the configuration is bound into the classes with annotation and needs a redeployment for any minor change - while ok during development, it's a nightmare during production and if the business wants to change a little thing in the application. > > Annotations make things easier by getting rid of XML and tying code > and configuration stronger together, but it's sometimes hard to see > the gain when strings become fragile multi-lined configuration > scripts. A good example of that would be ORM solutions and query > capabilities between Java and Ruby(Gorm)/C#(LINQ). But it's a general > thing as I said, notice for instance the problems of moving a project > between IDE's because we haven't had a project standard/conversion. > Maven is on the rise of course and it's the best we have, but it's > also an entirely different can of configuration worms. > > /Casper > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
