Please note there are 2 important APIs you should look at - JMX and
java preferences.
My view on configuration is that JMX should be used as the main
interface for the configurable components, and something similar
with java preferences ( but useable in JDK < 1.4 ) for storing/reading
the data.
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> >Please note that Apache Avalon already has a very nice and flexible
> >Configuration object.
>
> >Could you let me know how your\'s differs?
>
> The Avalon Configuration is good. I think that one that is better:
>
> 1) Is not in Avalo
>Please note that Apache Avalon already has a very nice and flexible
>Configuration object.
>Could you let me know how your\'s differs?
The Avalon Configuration is good. I think that one that is better:
1) Is not in Avalon but in commons
2) Allows for values and attributes at all levels in t
> From: Stéphane MOR [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Hi all,
>
> At work, I am building a Configuration framework (I'll call
> it Sysconf
> at it is the name of the package by now ...)
> , and I see that Jakarta also has one...
>
> The goal of this mail is to try and propose certain things fo
Interesting.
I have a config-framework myself, and lacks some of the kind of features that you
listed.
The features that I have in mine includes:
Bean-driven: sub packages in the system simply throws empty beans into the
configuration framework. The config framework populates the bean from th
Hi all,
At work, I am building a Configuration framework (I'll call it Sysconf
at it is the name of the package by now ...)
, and I see that Jakarta also has one...
The goal of this mail is to try and propose certain things for that
package .
There are differences between the framework that I
