On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Ioannis Canellos <ioca...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am glad that I see so much interest in it. > > It would make sense to use quartz instead of Java Timer mostly due to the > fact that quartz supports thread pooling while timers don't. So, I think > that it would be a good idea to replace Timers with Quartz. >
The JDK Timer is kinda @deprecated in favor of the ScheduledExecutorService in Java5+. The latter supports thread pooling. > @Glenn: No problem with peeping. We actually love feedback! What I have in > mind is providing a simple / simplistic feature that will hide the details > from the user (quartz api etc). I didn't intend to build a scheduler myself, > I just intended to integrate a the service registry with > a scheduling mechanism. > > @Mark: It would make sense to have a common mechanism. I will have a look at > what sling provides. > > > -- > *Ioannis Canellos* > * > http://iocanel.blogspot.com > > Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC > Apache ServiceMix <http://servicemix.apache.org/> Committer > * > -- Claus Ibsen ----------------- FuseSource Email: cib...@fusesource.com Web: http://fusesource.com Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
