On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 15:00, Graham Charters <[email protected]> wrote: > <snip> > I think what we have so far is the basics of 3. We should aim for > consistency across all three, but I think the sharing policy defaults > need to remain separate. If we were to choose just one policy, then > we will force the others into expressing a lot of unnecessary > information. We could broaden Application to cover all three, but I > think that would be confusing. Maybe there are other forms of > subsystem for the different sharing policies, where each is > specialized for the useful defaults.
I agree with having different default policies. What do you have in mind as to identify those different use cases from a user point of view ? Are you thinking about completely different set of manifest headers ? Or simply one which would contain the "kind" of application/subsystem defined ? -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ ------------------------ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
