On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 23:58, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 2:56 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto: >>> > IMHO JAMES specific mailets are an anti-pattern. we need to work > towards decoupling minimal SPIs for mailets from the large APIs used > internally by JAMES. i prefer to think about mailet loaders and > processor assemblers indepedently. avalon is not a good match for this > problem. more modern IoC containers like pico or spring as *much* > better.
+1 The underlying question is: What dependencies do mailets need? There is not a general answer to this question! Some mailets need only the mail itself and maybe some abstract (just-a-name) "target" processor. Some might need access to services through a generalizable interface, independent of James. Some even might need James-specific services. If we provide a solution to the first case, that'd be a pretty big step forward, already. The third case we already have solved :-) The second one is the toughest, because it needs a lot of knowlegde about how mailets could want to interact with their container. Every interaction is actually executed by looking up a container service and making calls to its service interface. So we could work towards a solution by defining the different dependent services we find in existing mailets and define interfaces for every one of them. So we avoid the need for having one swiss knife solution for everything and concentrate on the different aspects of mailet-container dependency one-by-one. Bernd --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
