Hi, Leo, Paul and All!
LS> ConnectionManagerBean extends DefaultConnectionManager
LS> {
LS> public ConnectionManagerBean( /* ... stuff goes here ... */ )
LS> {
LS> super();
LS> /** ... stuff goes here ... */
LS> }
LS> }
LS> there would be the need for an added constructor in either an existing
LS> class or a new class, right? And that constructor would need to be
LS> changed whenever a dependency is added, right?
If Leo has caught the idea right, then
1) it surely makes sense to automate this
(but, maybe we shall do that tomorrow and
use hand-craft today? :-)
2) if this is a separate class, should we packages it
* in the main jar
* in an additional jar
if we choose additional, then we shall save even those
tiny kb that would otherwise be added
>> I don't think you need to worry about Avalon users using the constructor directly.
LS> my thought was about people that use neither pico nor avalon but just
LS> need a reusable bean. One of the good things about pico is that you're
LS> also making that a real possibility, innit?
Truly speaking, I think it going to be great!
Probably we're approaching one step closer to the KISS idiom :)
I think we all feel a fresh wind blowing from Pico :-)
And the more inter-container compatibility the better :-))
- Anton
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
