On 4/20/06, Bernd Fondermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > interesting aspect to have a RPC-mailet. maybe this could be done with a > more generic approach: a mailet which takes as configuration parameters > a. a jar (hessian.jar, activemq.jar, whatever is neccessary) which it > loads on its own > and > b. a class contained within the jar which is instantiated by the mailet > > this class has all the logic to send the mail from the mailet to the > remote service. > > plusses: > there would be no explicit dependency on build time. > it would be open to any service. > > ...but maybe this is just over-engeneering ;-)
I would think these would be different mailets, but sharing the same notion. To the extent that we bundle these (optional) mailets, it means you can easily hook in whatever you want. I think that's key... IMHO this is why Spring became the runaway IoC impl... because they provided hooks into all the other libraries, making it much easier to develop. I understand Noel's concern about hap-hazzardly adding dependencies. But probably would not be too hard to do an RMI, JMS, whatever other RPC mailet you can think of. -- Serge Knystautas Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com p. 301.656.5501 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
