Bernd Fondermann wrote: > Well, the intention of this whole thing is to actually _lower_ Avalon > dependency. That's not always easy. ;-)
:-) > Currently, I'm simply working on providing means (setters) for Beans to > get stuff injected they need and eventually get rid of service(), > initialize() + configure() hell altogether. I'm not a particularly big fan of DI in the extremes that some take it. Adding N setters to M objects and the support code for inspecting who implements which DI methods in order to subscribe to those values, compared to a single injection as init(Config) doesn't make sense in most cases. For the DNS server, I'm thinking that we might want to look at switching to JNDI if we can ensure that we'll bypass Java's idiotic handling and go straight to dnsjava. See http://www.buzzsurf.com/java/dns/, but realize that the code is now part of the standard dnsjava distribution. > Should I revert all of it or only some parts? You need not revert anything. A veto does not mean revert. It means that until the veto is lifted, the code cannot be released. I am sure that we will come to a place that satisfies both of us before we need to worry about a release. --- Noel --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
