Paul Hammant wrote:
> Stephen,
>
>>> + If the handler requires another component, has a context and surely
>>> will need a configuration, what is the difference between it and
>>> a component?
>>
>>
>> None.
>>
>> That's one of the fundimentatal difference between Merlin and
>> Phoenix. Merlin is built using component oriented priocipals -
>> Phoenix is a componet management system built using object oriented
>> principals. The difference is really significant.
>
>
> I'm not sure that is fair, the Phoenix impl is laced together in XML
> allowing different components.
The difference is that the component your referring to are restricted in
terms of the lifecycle management. For example, they cannot have
depedencies. In contrast Merlin provides the container hierachy and the
extension mechanism that both enable full unrestricted components to act
as environment extensions. For example, if you need a container
providing "special-support" beyond normal component service dependecies,
you can apply several different approach:
* declare a container with depedencies (e.g. a container with a
depedency on a transaction server)
* create a container containing two sub-container - one for regual
components and the other for internal services - you parent container
can than make internal service available to the second container
* add facilities via the extension mechanisms
In all cases, we are dealing with first-class components without any
restrictions.
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
OSM SARL
digital products for a global economy
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.osm.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
