Claude said: ... > Nathan said : ... > > i think perhaps it could be cool to > > give developers the option of specifying in their web.xml an alternate > > ToolboxManager for VVS to use. This would not save you from writing your > > own manager or extending/modifying the ServletToolboxManager, but it would > > eliminate the need to extend the VVS. thoughts? > > Yes but - same remark... if one wants to share tools, one cannot have a specific ToolboxManager. > Imho, if we want to have a growing library of usefull tools, the maximum should be done to avoid the need to overload the VVS or the > ToolboxManager.
yes, i agree, if you want to distribute the tool, my suggestion is not very useful. that's one reason i asked what you needed this for. :-) but, just for the record, if we were to make the ToolboxManager easily pluggable in the VVS, then you could potential just distribute your manager with the tool. that's not the best solution, of course, but it's not wholly unreasonable. anyhow, given the specifics of your need, Gabe's suggestion certainly seems best. one thing you can keep in mind... i'm not sure what scope you intend to give this tool(session?), but you should take care to note that with the ServletToolboxManager, application scope tools that implement the ViewTool interface are initialized with the ServletContext directly and session or request scoped ViewTools are initialized with a ViewContext. Either way, that should give access to the resources you need. Nathan Bubna [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
