Rafal Krzewski wrote:
>
> The ConnectionPool should not be a Service. Look up the definition I've
> put into the Javadocs. Is ConnectionPool a singleon? No. The system
> may have multiple conncetion pools for multiple dbs. Does it need
> plugable implementation? No. You could plug in differend
> DBBrokerService that used any backend classes it wanted. Does it need
> to perform any initailization, be it early or late, or any shutdown
> activities? No. TurbineDBBrokerService performs all these activities.
> Therefore, ConnectionPool is merely an utility class uses by the
> DBBrokerService.
> I suggest you should move ConncetionPool to the org.apache.turbine.util.db.pool
>package,
> along with DBConnection class. They don't belong to the service
>definition/implementation.
Good explanation, done.
> DBBrokerService looks OK. Once you move database maps to
>turbine.services.db.MapBrokerService,
> it will be really good.
I will do this soon.
> You could also make a package.html file for the package, with a short description and
> an example of using the services.
Good idea, I'll get to this as well.
As always, your feedback is invaluable Rafal.
--
Daniel Rall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://collab.net/ | open source | do the right thing
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
