Sorry.
-- James Mitchell Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist Consulting / Mentoring / Freelance EdgeTech, Inc. 678.910.8017 AIM: jmitchtx Yahoo: jmitchtx MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean Schofield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 1:36 PM
Subject: Re: [chain] [nag] Please commit stuff for DispatchChain
I know its been a while since we discussed this ... but I would like to bring up the issue of DispatchChain again. I have a pressing need for something like this in my current application. I need to go ahead and move it into our project codebase or have it added to commons-chain. No hard feelings if I cannot convince you that this is useful.
I will briefly summarize my arguments again. The dispatch chain allows you to compose a chain of commands where the command method can be something other than execute. It will always have the same arguments and it will always be the same for every command in the chain. I think the fact that it is always the same method for every command in the chain is a key point here. Its still the CoR pattern. There is nothing special about the name of the execute method, the pattern just requires a consistent method.
If you do not accept this line of reasoning then I would suggest that DispatchLookupCommand be removed from the codebase as well. I don't think you can justify one and not the other. Finally, its in the generic package so its entirely optional if you don't want to use it.
I'd like to resolve this ASAP so I can go forward on my project here at work. Please give some thought to my arguments. As I said earlier, I will accept the decision of the group if the group cannot be persuaded.
Regards, sean
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 16:09:11 -0500, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:My original post to bugzilla didn't generate any responses. I figured once I wrote something and started pestering for a commit that would get the discussion going ;-)
I will await your guys feedback once you've had a chance to think about use cases, etc.
Let me know if you have any questions.
sean
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 11:37:47 -0600, Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 9:20 AM -0800 1/14/05, Craig McClanahan wrote:
> >I plead guilty to being lukewarm (is lukecold a word? :-) about
> >DispatchChain and friends being part of the standard chain package --
> >I'd like to spend some time tomorrow (Saturday) looking at the code
> >and seeing if I buy in to Sean's use cases.
>
> This has been my hesitation too. Since I haven't yet had a use case
> for it, it seems a bit heavy for inclusion in the core library.
>
> I wouldn't veto it, but it's why I have been hesitant. Like Craig, I
> haven't looked very carefully at it, so I haven't spoken up yet.
>
> Joe
>
> --
> Joe Germuska
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://blog.germuska.com
> "Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
