Stephen McConnell wrote: > I removed the release operation from the ServiceManager interface > on the grounds that any container that is properly handling release > should be using the ServicePool interface. You can see evidence of > the ambiguity of release in the DefaultComponentManager implementation > which is basically empty.
Doesn't this mean that anything that doesn't implement Poolable will not be released? If so, I was under the impression that it's the call to release that disposes the component. Won't this be a problem? If not (ie. ServicePool can lookup non-Poolable components), then the name "Service Pool" is not very intuitive... -Mark -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
