Thinking about it, we shouldn't change the system to accommodate the limitations of junit.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Aaron Smuts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 11:47 AM > To: Turbine JCS Developers List > Subject: RE: cache hub > > I'm pretty sure that the remote listeners will not behave well together. > The system is not designed to have multiple instances running. > > Actually, I can't think of any reason you'd want mulitple instances per > jvm > except for testing. This is probably not a good reason to change > anything. > > In normal usage, having multiple instances would just be wateful. > > Aaron > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: James Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 11:34 AM > > To: Turbine JCS Developers List > > Subject: RE: cache hub > > > > Perhaps we should key off a name other than the file name, to allow ease > > of configuration from non file sources (necessary when dealing with > > components). > > > > Makes sense to me in general though. > > > > On Wed, 2002-05-15 at 11:34, Aaron Smuts wrote: > > > There can be one unconfigured I guess and other that match the name of > > the > > > file. > > > > > > If you call configure it will return the defualt. > > > > > > If you pass in a configuration file name to configure, it will give > you > > the > > > preconfigured instance that matches that name. > > > > > > Aaron > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: James Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 11:17 AM > > > > To: Turbine JCS Developers List > > > > Subject: Re: cache hub > > > > > > > > I like the idea of being able to have more than one. We can still > > > > provide a service or component interface that allows singletonesque > > > > access. > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2002-05-15 at 11:05, Aaron Smuts wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Early on someone complained about how you could one have one > > instance of > > > > the > > > > > hub. I'm starting to think that is it a bad idea. > > > > > > > > > > It seems like you should be able to have as many instances as > > > > configuration > > > > > files. This could cause problems though. > > > > > > > > > > I'm not sure. > > > > > > > > > > One reason is that it isn't possible to create unit tests for the > > > > lateral > > > > > auxiliary otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > I need two instances of the same region with differently > configured > > > > lateral > > > > > caches. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-jcs-dev- > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-jcs-dev- > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-jcs-dev- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-jcs-dev- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
