Hi Pete:

Reading your reply I get the impression your thinking about something
different to what is being proposed.  The proposal concerns the 
CascadingConfiguration implementation for the apps/enterprise/orb
package - it is not related to the earlier activitiy of attempting
to incorporate a structural reference to a parent configuration.

See notes in-line.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, 28 February, 2002 09:07
> To: Avalon Developers List
> Subject: Re: CascadingConfiguration --> framework ?
> 
> 
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 08:03, Torsten Curdt wrote:
> > On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Peter Donald wrote:
> > > On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 04:40, Stephen McConnell wrote:
> > > > What do people think about moving the class CascadingConfiguration
> > > > from cornerstone/apps/orb to avalon/framework/configuration?
> > >
> > > Same as I thought last time you asked - ie erk. Until there can be a
> > > generic intuitive and simple mechanism it should not go into 
> > > framework.

The CascadingConfiguration implementation DOES provide a generic, intuitive
and simple mechanism.  I'm not sure what your looking at but its not what
your describing.  Can you identify one single operation in the 
CascadingConfiguration implementation which is not 100% consistent with 
the interface spec, and 100% consistent with a generally expected result?

> > ...if you can come up with something better ;)
> 
> I don't it a problem with a simple solution.
> 
> > After this discussion I doubt there is a more "intuitive" and
> > "intelligent" way of doing this. 
> 
> Berin once proposed a Rules based mechaism that was fairly 
> intuitive IIRC - 
> never got beyond prototyping stage though.
> 
> > ...but hey, there is something that works - at least for the most
> > use-cases. 
> 
> you sure? There aint nothing that I have been presented with that 
> covers any of my needs.

Pete - are you "really" looking at the same thing.  
I'm suprised!  I think  maybe your assuming this proposal concerns the
patch to AbstractConfiguration that I raised issue about. Its not that
- it the CascadingConfiguration implemenmtation that has been well and 
try validated.

Steve.


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

Reply via email to