Adam Bien wrote on 06/14/2011 10:15 PM:
>
> On 14.06.2011, at 22:45, Bill Shannon wrote:
>
>> Adam Bien wrote on 06/14/11 12:13 PM:
>>>
>>> On 13.06.2011, at 22:48, Bill Shannon wrote:
>>>
>>>> We discussed this "staging" concept quite a bit internally for EE 6.
>>>> In the end we left it out of the platform because it didn't seem to
>>>> solve any problem that couldn't already be solved using other existing
>>>> mechanisms, at least as it was being proposed at the time.
>>>>
>>>> We found *very* few cases where the behavior of existing APIs would
>>>> change based on what "stage" you were in. About the best we came up
>>>> with was that some web application errors might want to produce more
>>>> useful output when in development stage. But since we specify very
>>>> little about what such output should contain, products already have
>>>> the flexibility to vary their behavior in this regard.
>>>>
>>>> If the behavior of the platform APIs don't change based on the stage,
>>>> what is it used for? Well, applications could change their behavior
>>>> based on the stage, but they can already do that using an appropriate
>>>> JNDI environment variable of their own choosing; we didn't really need
>>>> to specify that.
>>>
>>> But then you will have to change the application code. With stage dependent application server settings you
>>> would modify the application server settings, without touching the application.
>>
>> Well, you have to change the application code to read the variable and
>> make use of it, but once you do that you can set different values of
>> the variable without changing the application.
>
> I meant: you do not have to change the application to move it from one stage to another.
So then we agree that using JNDI environment variables to hold the stage
means you do not have to change the application to move from one stage
to another, right?