Berin Loritsch wrote:
>
> Antti Koivunen wrote:
> > Berin Loritsch wrote:
> > > Let's take a quick look at both of these.
> >
> > JNDI is an interface for naming services. It's not meant just for
> > component management, but provides a convenient (and popular) way of
> > handling it.
>
> And it can be used to resolve CORBA requests (with the right Context)
>
> >
> > CORBA is meant primarily for managing and sharing objects (including
> > components) in distributed environments.
> >
> > Now, as both of these are commonly used for managing components, it
> > should be made easy to integrate either one in the core Avalon
> component
> > management.
> >
> > The issue of Component vs. Object really comes down to the following
> > question: should an object be required to implement an empty marker
> > interface to be regarded as a component (thus making integration with
> > other systems more difficult)? I think not.
>
> We agree on this point.

I think we all agree on this point.
What we don't appear to agree on is the approach to correcting that anomaly.
Berin your proposing a fresh new approach which IMO is substantially heavier
than the current approach - and that makes me feel uncomfortable because the
current CM/SM approach matches my needs very nicely.

> >> That is why I proposed the resolver interfaces, to solicit feedback on
> >> that.  Is this something that will satisfy everyone's need?  I think it
> >> will be a much better fit than even the current CM/CS approach we have
> >> now.
> >
> > Is it intended to replace CM/CS?
>
> IMO Yes.

IMO No - its something else.

Cheers, Steve.


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to