> Could someone explain why the distinction between resources provided by
the
> container and resources not provided by the container is important *to the
> component* itself?
Good question. And I agree with you that the Context and Compose (oh,
excuse me, Service) look awfully similar. The primary difference, from what
I can see, from the perspective of a component appears to be a lifecycle
issue. Context is available early in the lifecycle, Services are available
later in the lifecycle.
Once there is a scalable container that allows pluggable profiles, there is
no reason why an application could not provide its own context namespace(s)
as well as component Services. I think that this is still an open issue,
architecturally, as evidenced by the disparate views appearing from Avalon
Committers.
I trust that we'll learn something from correction(s) to the above.
--- Noel
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
