Herve Quiroz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Hi all,
ReHi,
> * First, the defaults. Why is it a protected field in BaseConfiguration ?
Well. Because the first one to write this code did it like this? If you
think, this should be changed, send me a patch. I'll review it and if it
does not change user visible behaviour (at least not too much :-) then
I'll put it in.
>I mean why don't you have the following in the Configuration interface:
> Configuration.setDefaults(Configuration defaults)
>So a Configuration object (here defaults) could act as the "fallback" for
>another one.
This might lead to your second point: Shall the new Object just "proxy"
the settings of the default or should it copy them?
[... more on proxying and subsets ...]
Hm. I'm pretty sure noone really thought about this as much as you
did. The configurations package is used most of the time to provide
simple access to properties keys and there has been some work for
XML. If you can unwind all the cases for subsets, feel free to do
so. As most of the current users don't need that kind of "changing
properties on the fly via subsets", it wasn't ever implemented.
commons-configuration is a really quiet package so if you feel that
you can contribute patches for improvements, feel free to post them
here or send them to me and Martin Poeschl (as we seem to be the only
active developers on configuration at the moment) and if they don't
break current behaviour too much, we'll put them in.
Regards
Henning
--
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen -- Geschaeftsfuehrer
INTERMETA - Gesellschaft fuer Mehrwertdienste mbH [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Am Schwabachgrund 22 Fon.: 09131 / 50654-0 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
D-91054 Buckenhof Fax.: 09131 / 50654-20
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
