IMHO, if you provide reasonable conventions on how to build and deploy services that use River you dont need to clutter the distribution with options that will ultimately lead to confusion down the stretch.
BTW, happy new year to all, I hope 2011 offers all opportunities for success. Dennis On Dec 31, 2010, at 1211PM, Sim IJskes - QCG wrote: > On 31-12-10 17:18, [email protected] wrote: >> Isn't that already jsk-platform.jar? I would object to anything that >> subverts the dynamic proxy loading concept that is central to Jini. >> >> It is imperative that people don't, for instance, get the >> service-registrar proxy impls in their local class path. That would >> break compatibility with future or alternate impls. > > If it would be easier for people to work with river, why would we be against > it. It is about offering people options, not about forcing people to use a > certain concept. I do think to use the word 'subverting' is indicating a > strong tendency to force people to use a certain piece of software in the way > you think they should. I think this is way too directive. > > Gr. Sim
