mbryson wrote:
>
> The main reason was because I wanted to make sure there was only one
> instance
> of them. Also I wasn't sure I had in mind what you defined as a Service. But
> after looking again, I could have GlobalCache and TurbineScheduler extend
> TurbineBaseService. They could then be started via
>
> TurbineService.getService(GlobalCache);
>
> Also Brett questioned whether the Scheduler should be a Service. Brett, any
> inputs?
I questioned that it _shouldn't_ be one. It should be for sure...
however, I leave in the caveat that the Services themselves need to be
revamped... ahhh, time time where are you when I need you?
For now just make it a service, and I'll worry about updating it later
if changes are needed for the services revamp.
-Brett
>
> dave
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jon * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Turbine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sunday, January 23, 2000 1:25 PM
> Subject: services
>
> >why aren't the cache and schedule services implemented as services?
> >
> >-jon
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------
> >To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
