commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <>
Subject Re: [CONFIGURATION] Which CombinedConfiguration
Date Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:02:03 GMT

On Oct 12, 2009, at 12:38 PM, Oliver Heger wrote:

> Ralph Goers schrieb:
>> On Oct 10, 2009, at 8:23 AM, Oliver Heger wrote:
>>> Ralph Goers schrieb:
>>>> On Oct 7, 2009, at 10:54 PM, Oliver Heger wrote:
>>>>> ralph.goers schrieb:
>>>>>> I'm trying to port my changes to fix CONFIGURATION-390 from my  
>>>>>> trunk sandbox
>>>>>> to configuration2-experimental. But there are two  
>>>>>> CombinedConfiguration
>>>>>> classes, one in the main directory and one under combined.  
>>>>>> Which one should
>>>>>> be removed and which needs the fix?
>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>> The one under combined should be the final one. Sorry for the  
>>>>> confusion.
>>>> This is a big problem for me. I tried switching  
>>>> DefaultConfigurationBuilder to the combined/CombinedConfiguration  
>>>> and got all kinds of errors in TestDefaultConfigurationBuilder  
>>>> (also switching that to use combined). I've spent days trying to  
>>>> figure out how to merge the CONFIGURATION-390 changes to the  
>>>> branch without much luck.
>>> Obviously the branch is a pretty mess with work started and not  
>>> finished. I think DefaultConfigurationBuilder still uses the old  
>>> classes because not all of its dependencies have been ported to  
>>> use the AbstractHierarchicalConfiguration base class.
>>> Meanwhile I work on some new ideas in the base package which are  
>>> yet a different approach.
>>> No idea how we can clean up things. Maybe I should do my new  
>>> experiments in a new branch?
>>> For the reloading problem I wonder whether it makes sense at all  
>>> to apply these changes to the branch. IMHO we should redesign the  
>>> reloading operations completely for configuration2.
>> Rather than making further changes I think it would make sense to  
>> just get rid of the "old" stuff so that there aren't two  
>> CombinedConfiguratons, two sets of Combiners and two expression  
>> engines. Once we are back to just one it should make it easier to  
>> make changes again.
> Okay, in the next days I will try how far I get with the reworked  
> classes, so that we can get rid of the old ones. IIRC I also had  
> some trouble with DefaultConfigurationBuilder.
> Did you apply some changes to CombinedConfiguration which are not  
> ported to combined/CombinedConfiguration?

Yes. And DynamicCombinedConfiguration as well. But I have a suspicion  
that other changes weren't applied as well. Hopefully it shouldn't be  
too hard to do a diff between the two and reconcile the differences.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message