The name IMO is. A static facade "ConfigurationProvider" is misleading because its naming pattern overlaps with SPI elements commonly named *Provider everywhere (especially in JSRs, not every other "framework" popular or not even makes a distinction between API and SPI;-)
Seems DeltaSpike brought that antipattern into Tamaya since there's at least one "provider" package with static facade singletons. If Tamaya can live with that, then why not in this Apache PoC. Neither Tamaya nor DeltaSpike or Spring will be a 1:1 blueprint for a future standard we probably see at least after JavaOne based on what Oracle plans for "Java EE in the Cloud". Cheers, Werner On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> wrote: > That's how it used to be since pretty much almost the beginning. > And that part was also not in question imo. > > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > > > On Thursday, 21 July 2016, 16:02, Anatole Tresch <atsti...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > yep... > > > > 2016-07-21 14:08 GMT+02:00 Werner Keil <werner.k...@gmail.com>: > > > >> Anatole/all, > >> > >> So ConfigurationProvider boils down to just a getConfiguration() method > >> now? > >> > >> > >> >
