>From: Stephen McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: "Avalon Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Avalon Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: [VOTE] New name for Version 5 ComponentManager
>Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 18:45:21 +0200
>
>
>
>Fredrik Hultin wrote:
>
>>I have a question as a newbie user of Avalon.
>>Even though ComponentManager maybe is not the *perfect* name for what
>>you want to achieve it is still used by all users of the Avalon
>>framework isn't it? So why not keep the name so old users doesn't have
>>to relearn or read the developer lists to understand what has happened
>>to the ComponentManager. As documentation doesn't seem to be you're main
>>interest this would probably save a lot of people a lot of grieve...
>>
>>Imagine sun changing EJB to something else although meaning almost the
>>same thing...
>>
>>I might have misunderstood the reason for the name change and in that
>>case please disregard this mail.
>>
>The reason is that the name "ComponentManager" suggests that an
>implementation of the interface is actually managing the component it
>supplies to the consumer component it is servicing when in fact it is
>simply defining a opaque registry of components accessible by a key. The
>use of the term "Manager" in the interface definition has led to the
>assumption the management functionality "belongs" within a CM
>implementation when in fact the real management should provided by the
>container implementation.
>
Got ya. Although the CM is a registry why not call it ComponentRegistry?
Ignore that... no more names ComponentLocator is good.
>Changing from ComponentManager to ComponentLocator eliminates that
>ambiguity (another wrinkle in the fabric bites the dust).
>
I am sure that for many developers you are only moving the wrinkle :). At
some point I think it is best to accept names just because they have been
accepted and everybode knows what they mean. The question is when to stop
alter basic names and ideas? I don't know but a guess would be when the
*old* user are more than the *new* users of the system (within a short
period of time) as this would lead to fewer people having to relearn.
Another problem is of course documentation that all of a sudden becomes old
and invalid and when they are being updated they need to both bring old
developers up to speed with the name shifts and learning newbies the
concepts.
I don't say that this is the case with the Avalon framework although it
seems strange that a 5.0 release of a framework still makes big changes.
Cheers
Fredrik
-----------------------------------
Don't take life too seriously --
you'll never get out of it alive.
-----------------------------------
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
