It should definitely be configurable, but I agree that it's best to focus on a default provided one for now.
On 20 May 2010, at 17:40, Alex Snaps wrote: > That's how I started so far, yes. But that's still one thing I also wonder > about. I thought that maybe, in some rare cases, one would want to specify > the URL (rather than access to the one the f/w set up). But this goes with > crappy consideration about the lifecycle of it all (like each test class > specify a different desired URL), also should the f/w be able to connect > "tests" to some random l2, not f/w managed? > I've decided to ignore these 2 concerns for now. I think 99% of the use cases > won't require anything like that, wdyt? -- Geert Bevin Terracotta - http://www.terracotta.org _______________________________________________ tc-dev mailing list tc-dev@lists.terracotta.org http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev
