Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > For example, by the time we're
> > done, I expect that configure() will be replaced by init(), and
> > we'll have eliminated the Avalon API from polluting the code.
> I don't think that eliminating Avalon API from the code will be so easy.
It won't be so hard if we stop propogating the Avalon API where it doesn't
belong and isn't needed.
> We have the same problems that we have in Mailets: if you need a service
> you have to be Serviceable or to lookup the ServiceManager from the
Context.
Mailets ought to access key services via the MailetContext. That is why we
have MailetConfig and MailetContext, just like the Servlet API. Mailets
were never supposed to deal with Avalon. The few that had to were
aberrations that were supposed to be fixed by improving the Mailet
environment.
> Imho moving to init is probably a bad move: I prefer to have a clear
> dependency on Avalon instead of having an hidden/subtle dependency on
> Avalon.
I want NO dependency on Avalon. The handlers should follow the same
pattern. The key services can be exposed by passing in a config from which
we can get to a HandlerContext.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
