I didn't say that's the way you should do it, necessarily. I just said that it's a cool feature.
-----Original Message----- From: Mike Snare [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 5:29 PM To: Tapestry users Subject: Re: POJO dependency injection (with interface) into TAP4 application Seems to me that that imposes certain arbitrary restrictions on how you name and package your future DAOs. What you're going for is the ability to replace functionality as needed with minimal cost. Again, if this is released as a library and someone wants to provide their own, what should they do? Taken to it's logical conclusion, this has the entire classname replaced with ${dao.person.impl} which needs to be replaced. That would appear to defeat the entire purpose since, for the same effort, you could just override the default implementation with your own (either piecemeal or wholesale, depending on whether you expose the provider or individual DAOs) -Mike --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
