On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 08:24, Leo Sutic wrote: > > This has to be solved - existance of different semantic approaches > > to component management mean that components are designed > > and implememtated today relative to a target container family. We > > have two semantic models - the ECM/Fortress/MicroContainer model > > and the containerkit/Phoenix/Merlin. Either of these two approaches > > must die or we must make a formal distrinction between them and live > > with the consequences. > > Is this the component-as-service difference? I.e. in > contaierkit/Phoenix/Merlin all components are what the ECM world calls > ThreadSafe?
Nope. The components do not state or enforce any sort of lifecycle style. It is up to assembler to assemble it correctly for their particular components. -- Cheers, Peter Donald ------------------------------------------------------- To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting. - Sun Tzu, 300 B.C. ------------------------------------------------------- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
