Oh, one more thing.  As I wrote my unit tests for my ConfigurationService, I
realized I had a stack of issues with the code in commons-configuration.  I
have since applied all the patches and now my test for ConfigurationServicer
is working.  Quinton, if you get a chance, can you regenerate the jar for
maven assuming they haven't grabbed it yet?  If you don't have time, that is
fine.  I am sure there will be other changes to commons configuration before
I am done.

Eric

-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton McCombs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 1:06 PM
To: Turbine Developers List
Subject: RE: Anyone Review Configuration Changes?


I think that all of the bootstrap information should come from web.xml.
I don't really see any need for an additional configuration file.  I
would also like to see configuration data supplied in web.xml override
TR.props.

--------------------------------------------
Quinton McCombs
NequalsOne - HealthCare marketing tools
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.NequalsOne.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 10:58 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Anyone Review Configuration Changes?
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, I actually wrote the configuration service.  
> However, I don't want to go too far down the road without 
> buyin from everybody.  I guess what I meant is that was the 
> tweak (the loop hole) that I had to make to Turbine.java.
> 
> So, is the consensus that we load up a minimal prop file, and 
> then use that to bootstrap all the config stuff from?  Or 
> does someone have an example web.xml to share.
> 
> Eric
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Quinton McCombs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 11:54 AM
> To: Turbine Developers List
> Subject: RE: Anyone Review Configuration Changes?
> 
> 
> No.  There is no configuration service.  Look at how the 
> current code works.
> 
> --------------------------------------------
> Quinton McCombs
> NequalsOne - HealthCare marketing tools 
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.NequalsOne.com 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 10:47 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: Anyone Review Configuration Changes?
> > 
> > 
> > Okay,
> > 
> > Here is my thinking now that I started writing code.  Henning
> > is right about the dangers of a service.  To have the config 
> > work, it must load FIRST, before avaloncomponents or the 
> > regular components.  Which means another tweak to 
> > Turbine.java: <snip> //
> >         // Be sure, that our essential services get run early
> >         //
> >         configuration.setProperty(TurbineServices.SERVICE_PREFIX +
> >                                   
> > ConfigurationService.SERVICE_NAME + ".earlyInit",
> >                                   new Boolean(true));
> > 
> >         configuration.setProperty(TurbineServices.SERVICE_PREFIX +
> >                                   
> > ComponentService.SERVICE_NAME + ".earlyInit",
> >                                   new Boolean(true));
> > 
> >         configuration.setProperty(TurbineServices.SERVICE_PREFIX +
> >                                   
> > AvalonComponentService.SERVICE_NAME + ".earlyInit",
> >                                   new Boolean(true));
> > 
> >         serviceManager.setConfiguration(configuration);
> > <snip>
> > 
> > My idea was that the ConfigurationService would load, find
> > the various config settings required to load all the 
> > configurations.  Populate a CompositeConfiguration from that, 
> > (including the default TR.props config) and then update the 
> > global Configuration.  Then the later services all loaded by 
> > the serviceManager would have the proper configurations.
> > 
> > Having said that, maybe what we need is more of a bootstrap
> > config file.  I don't know how important backwards 
> > compatiblity is, but we could say the if you use this code, 
> > then the default tr.props because a boot strap that specs out 
> > all the configfiles.  (one of which could be itself).  Then, 
> > instead of a service, we just go ahead and create the 
> > CompositeConfiguration right in the Turbine.configure() 
> > method.  This then would be backwards compatable. 
> > 
> > However, if there are other suggestions, please make them!
> > 
> > ERic
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Quinton McCombs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 11:14 AM
> > To: Turbine Developers List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: Anyone Review Configuration Changes?
> > 
> > 
> > I am all for moving stuff into web.xml.
> > 
> > --------------------------------------------
> > Quinton McCombs
> > NequalsOne - HealthCare marketing tools
> > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.NequalsOne.com 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Henning P. Schmiedehausen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 9:58 AM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: Anyone Review Configuration Changes?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > > 
> > > >Secondly,
> > > >I am thinking about the CompositeConfiguration stuff as working 
> > > >somewhat similar to how the various schedular jobs are
> > listed in the
> > > >TR.props. Basically something like this:
> > > 
> > > >services.ConfigurationService.configurations=propertiesSource
> > > ,JNDISourc
> > > >e
> > > 
> > > >services.ConfigurationService.configurations.propertiesSource
> > > .file=/web
> > > >-inf/
> > > >conf/MyProperties.props
> > > 
> > > Then we're back on "ResourcesService", which got removed
> > for 2.3-dev.
> > > 
> > > The problem with "logging" and "configuration" is, that these are 
> > > special. You simply can't move this stuff into services without 
> > > starting to build loopholes and shortcuts, because 
> without logging 
> > > and configuration, you can't do very much else.
> > > 
> > > >services.ConfigurationService.configurations.JNDISource.prefi
> > > x=java:com
> > > >p/env
> > > 
> > > Stuff like this must IMHO come from the web.xml or from a 
> very very 
> > > small "meta" configuration file (which might simply be a sub 
> > > category of the TR.props) that gets parsed only with 
> Properties or 
> > > XML Configuration.
> > > 
> > > Using a service for this got tested in T2.0 and T2.1 It
> > does not work.
> > > 
> > >   Regards
> > >           Henning
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen          
> INTERMETA GmbH
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]        +49 9131 50 654 0   
> http://www.intermeta.de/
> > > 
> > > Java, perl, Solaris, Linux, 
> xSP Consulting, Web Services freelance 
> > > consultant -- Jakarta Turbine Development  --
> > hero for hire
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to