Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi, Mike.
It's a very good summary. The different perspectives are now well
separated and they should be discussed on different threads to avoid
further confusions :-).
Please see some more comments inline.
I added a couple of responses on specific points below.
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Mike Edwards
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
b) A variety of functional components, that represent sets of coherent
functions.
Each consists of a series of the basic modules, aggregated together.
Their function in life is to assist developers of
Thanks Mike for putting things in perspective. It always helps to think of
these topics in terms of problem that we are trying to solve and who the
audience is before we get into the details of how to solve it. Your idea of
creating wiki pages for each of these topics will help clarify things
ant elder wrote:
So just to be clear on what is being suggested this would be like the
launcher we used to have back in M2 days right?
...ant
No, the M2 launcher mixed too many different aspects:
a) load the Tuscany JARs
b) download then from the network as necessary
b) launch your
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 3:50 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ant elder wrote:
So just to be clear on what is being suggested this would be like the
launcher we used to have back in M2 days right?
...ant
No, the M2 launcher mixed too many different aspects:
a)
Simon Nash wrote:
Actually this isn't quite what I was saying. (Sorry that I wasn't clear.)
I'm talking about the lowest level components that we distribute as
binaries, not about larger groupings that are created from these components
to provide convenient aggregations of functionality. These
Hi, Mike.
It's a very good summary. The different perspectives are now well separated
and they should be discussed on different threads to avoid further
confusions :-).
Please see some more comments inline.
Thanks,
Raymond
--
From: Mike
+1 from me also. We shouldn't confuse modularity purely with
versioning or whether something can be used on its own. It's also
about being able to make different combinations of modules to fit
different deployment profiles.
I think it was Ant who first brought up the distinction between what
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
There are a few patterns we use to determine if a maven module is
required. Let's take the contribution stuff as an example.
1) contribution contains the interfaces for the contribution model and
default implementation classes, SPIs and
Graham Charters wrote:
+1 from me also. We shouldn't confuse modularity purely with
versioning or whether something can be used on its own. It's also
about being able to make different combinations of modules to fit
different deployment profiles.
I agree with that, and this should be
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wonder if some of this debate is due to us not all talking about they same
thing so maybe it would help to go back to this proposal:
Here's what I'd like to see as a user:
- a short list of API JARs that I can
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Simon Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
There are a few patterns we use to determine if a maven module is
required. Let's take the contribution stuff as an example.
1) contribution contains the
ant elder wrote:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Simon Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
There are a few patterns we use to determine if a maven module is
required. Let's take the contribution stuff as an example.
1) contribution
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wonder if some of this debate is due to us not all talking about they same
thing so maybe it would help to go back to this proposal:
Here's what I'd like to see as a user:
- a short list of
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Simon Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Simon Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
There are a few patterns we use to determine if a maven module is
On 6/10/08, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Rajini Sivaram
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
If we are anyway going to require a launcher of some form,
wouldn't it be just as easy to maintain one-bundle-per-module?
I agree, if we go back to requiring a launcher that changes a lot how we'd
could put this
If we assume one bundle per Tuscany module for developers, perhaps
there's a need for a separate concept that provides a simplified view
for users? The SpringSource Application Platform has the concept of a
library, which has caused much debate in the OSGi world (it has its
own manifest header).
On 6/11/08, Graham Charters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If we assume one bundle per Tuscany module for developers, perhaps
there's a need for a separate concept that provides a simplified view
for users? The SpringSource Application Platform has the concept of a
library, which has caused much
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Rajini Sivaram
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
,snip
You have probably read this already, but others may find Neil Bartlett's
discussion useful:
http://www.eclipsezone.com/articles/extensions-vs-services/
Great article, thanks for the link. Thats over a year old
2008/6/11 ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Rajini Sivaram
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
,snip
You have probably read this already, but others may find Neil Bartlett's
discussion useful:
http://www.eclipsezone.com/articles/extensions-vs-services/
Great article,
Hi Rajini, couple of comments below
2008/6/11 Rajini Sivaram [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 6/11/08, Graham Charters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If we assume one bundle per Tuscany module for developers, perhaps
there's a need for a separate concept that provides a simplified view
for users? The
Comments inline.
Simon
Rajini Sivaram wrote:
On 6/10/08, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien
Hi,
There are a few patterns we use to determine if a maven module is required.
Let's take the contribution stuff as an example.
1) contribution contains the interfaces for the contribution model and
default implementation classes, SPIs and extension points
2) contribution-xml deals with the
Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
There are a few patterns we use to determine if a maven module is
required. Let's take the contribution stuff as an example.
1) contribution contains the interfaces for the contribution model and
default implementation classes, SPIs and extension points
2)
Simon Nash wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I'd like to discuss the following: What distro Zips are we building
and
what do they contain?
I think we could improve our distro scheme to
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I'd like to discuss the following: What distro Zips are we
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I'd like to discuss the following: What distro Zips are we
Hi,
Please see my comments inline.
Thanks,
Raymond
[snip]
Good requirement, but I don't think that the current manifest +
tuscany-all JAR solution is a good one (for example it mixes APIs and
internals in the same JAR, doesn't work well with IDEs, works only for one
big distro, requires
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I'd like to discuss the following: What
Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
Please see my comments inline.
Thanks,
Raymond
[snip]
Good requirement, but I don't think that the current manifest +
tuscany-all JAR solution is a good one (for example it mixes APIs and
internals in the same JAR, doesn't work well with IDEs, works only for
one big
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I'd like to discuss the following: What
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 6:52 PM, Raymond Feng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Please see my comments inline.
Thanks,
Raymond
[snip]
Good requirement, but I don't think that the current manifest +
tuscany-all JAR solution is a good one (for example it mixes APIs and
internals in the same
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 7:03 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL
34 matches
Mail list logo
