[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Yes and no. If you consider that the resources should be complete upon
> the start of the application, then the use of RuntimeException is valid
> but if you consider the cases we discussed with Jason where the resources
> can be completed after the initialization (by querying an administrator to
> provide the correct values), such an exception really becomes an
> applicative exception and should be processed by any code using such a
> service.
I disagree. J2EE specfications state that the configuration information
is built in three stages
- component creation
- application assembly
- application deployment
After that application is up and running.
I think that querying the administrator (or the first user) for
configuration
values at runtime is a bad idea.
> the static accessor class and service interface should not be in the package of
> the implementation but in the services package.
>
> For example, for a 'GlobalCache' service, the default service template
> should be IMO:
>
> org.apache.turbine.services.GlobalCache - static accessor
> org.apache.turbine.services.GlobalCacheService - service definition
> org.apache.turbine.services.globalcache - default service impl package
> org.apache.turbine.services.globalcache.PersistentGlobalCacheService
> - example impl of the service
> It allows people to use:
> import org.apache.turbine.services.*;
> and access any services they wish.
I like this idea! The only downside I see, is that the 'services'
package
would become rather bloated, and the framework classes would be hidden
among among actual services. Maybe we should move those classes into
'services.framework' package? What do you think?
--
Rafal Krzewski
Senior Internet Developer
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+48 22 8534830 http://e-point.pl
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
