Ate Douma wrote: > Carsten Ziegeler wrote: >> Hi, >> >> the PortletInvokerService is contained in the optional services section, >> however it is not optional. The container implementation gets the >> service and directly calls it. >> The (default) implementation of this service belongs to the driver. > Actually, hardly any of the services is functionally optional. > > The distinction between optional and required (as initially setup by > David DeWolf when he started Pluto 1.1.x) is between those services > which you don't need to provide yourself because the container has (or > better: had) a build-in default implementation, and those which really > are "required" to be provided by the embedding portal as the container > cannot impose a sensible default solution. > > Now, with the separation of the container-driver-api and > container-driver impl as you are now performing through PLUTO-492, It's Pluto-545 :)
> this > distinction really gets blurred. Now, "optional" only remains meaningful > when also using the container-driver impl... Yes. > > So, in my view, this "optional/required" distinction is a "feature" of > the container-driver, not the container itself. Yepp. > In the light of the ongoing PLUTO-492 issue, we could (but I'm not > saying we need) consider dropping this distinction from the container > POV and only use it in and for the container-driver impl. I think we should really do this; optional doesn't make sense from the container api pov. If noone objects I'll perform the changes as part of PLUTO-545. Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler [email protected]
