Daniel Fagerstrom wrote: > Carsten Ziegeler skrev: >> Daniel Fagerstrom wrote: >> >>> After you made the Settings object available on its own the Core doesn't >>> seem to be used much anymore. So it seem like a good idea to remove it. >>> The only remaining use seem to be as a shielding of the >>> EnvironmentHelper. What is your plan for that functionality? >>> >> I think we can make this available through the BeanFactory as well; but >> I'm not sure if this is a proper use of a bean factory. So basically, >> you have to lookup the bean each time you use it. WDYT? > > I'm not certain either. The solution with you choose with a statically > available thread local, lead to less code, so it seem like a good > solution :) > Yes :) Now, the idea with the Core object was to provide a "cleaner" interface to the static methods. I think, I'll create a utility class with static methods that wrap the environment helper stuff. This allows us to later change the internal stuff (environment helper etc) if required with breaking any api.
Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG http://www.s-und-n.de http://www.osoco.org/weblogs/rael/
