Ok. Makes a good deal of sense. Just wasn't clear if it was duplication of effort, but if the eventual goal is to move it to Commons, don't see why not.
May be able to contribute the XML one, but have to take a look at the Configuration first. Kelvin ----- Original Message ----- From: James Taylor To: Turbine Developers List Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 8:15 PM Subject: Re: cvs commit:jakarta-turbine-torque/src/java/org/apache/torque/oid IDBroker.java The configuration package contains an interface for accessing config data. One implementation of Configuration is properties based, which is similar to / based on ExtendedProperties. However using the configuration package allows use of other (yet to be implemented) configuration formats. An XML one is planned (the empty class is already there). In the future others will exist, or users can implement their own, and configure fulcrum, torque, or turbine with it. The move is turbine level only. This is consistent with the goals of stratum, to isolate reusable discrete components in turbine, factor them out, refine them, and when they are ready eventually move them to commons. More abstraction, more flexibility. -- jt On Thu, 2002-02-07 at 04:17, Kelvin Tan wrote: > I see. Hmmm...so if you don't mind me asking, what's the purpose behind this migration? Didn't see much discussion on the mailing list about this...(or I might've missed it in the noise) > > Is it an Apache-level move towards stratum.configuration, or is the purpose for the Turbine project to be more self-contained? And of course, the reply begs the question: if it's more or less the same, why move? :) > > Haven't seen the stratum.configuration package (think it was introduced yesterday or the day before only), but is it a wrapper around ExtendedProps or an implementation as well? > > K > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Martin Poeschl > To: Turbine Developers List > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 4:47 PM > Subject: Re: cvs commit: jakarta-turbine-torque/src/java/org/apache/torque/oid IDBroker.java > > > Kelvin Tan wrote: > > I've noticed a bunch of commits moving away from Commons' ExtendedProperties, towards stratum.configuration. > > > > How stable is stratum.configuration wrt to ExtendedProperties? Would you consider it production-quality? > > the code for the configuration package is more or less the same as ExtendedProperties > > > > > Regards, > > Kelvin > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
