Re: Contents of Tuscany SCA 1.0 release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
Hi Radim, It's great to get your feedback on this. Your posts to the user list (including those with tough questions, like Java2WSDL and on the fly WSDL generation :-) have been much appreciated. I am currently working on asynchronous support for callbacks. The @OneWay part of async is already working in the current trunk and we just need a test case for it, which I will add when I have got callbacks into reasonable shape. At the moment I am working on TUSCANY-1496 which will greatly simplify the callback implementation by treating callbacks almost identically to forward calls both within the core framework and within binding extensions. I am also looking at TUSCANY-1347 and TUSCANY-1500 which relate to slightly more advanced use cases for callbacks including some gaps in our support for the full Java API for callbacks. Callbacks and conversations are intimately connected and SimonL and I have had one discussion about this and some of the spec points that are not 100% clear. I'm expecting to work with SimonL to bring together his work on conversations with my work on callbacks, and to have full support in the 1.0 release for both callbacks and conversations (and the interactions between them). This support would include the core framework as well as the Web Service binding. After this is all taken care of, I would be very interested in putting together a sample of the type that you describe with complex POJO types (which I would like to represent as SDOs) and Web Services. This would require getting the SDO tooling story sorted as well. Of course, someone else might get to this one ahead of me :-) I would be interested to know whether this would meet your requirement, or whether you are specifically looking to pass around non-SDO POJOs. Simon Radim Kolarik wrote: Hi Ant, the top priority regarding web services would be having on fly generation of WSDL, without the need of having to supply own file. Axis2 can do it for its services described in services.xml file. It would also help if there was a working example that would use complex POJO types as parameters and results of a service call, deployed as a web service, as I am struggling to make this work. It is not clear to me if I need to supply services.xml or not for Axis to make complex types working (register serializers/deserializers). Also important are following items in your list, however, not as important as the above issues. The items are ordered by priority. - WS Security - Sort out our WSDL tooling story - get SDO integrated into Axis2? - asynchronous services - conversational services Thanks a lot! Radim On 8/7/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/SCA+Java+Next+Release+Contentshttp://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/SCA+Java+Next+Release+Contents Note that its likely we wont have time to get everything listed there done in 1.0 so please say which things are important to you to help us prioritize what does get done. ...ant On 8/7/07, Radim Kolarik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Jean-Sebastien, where is the SCA Java Releases wiki page which lists some work items in ws binding space, that you mentioned? Thanks, Radim On 8/6/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Bringing this thread up again as time is ticking on if we want to get a release out this month. How would people feel about taking a branch for this release in a bit less than 2 weeks, say aiming for the 14/15th of August? That should just about give enough time for clean up and voting to get a release out by the end of August. Another thing I wondered about was the name, we've been talking about this being 0.92, how about something higher to show we're getting closer, maybe 0.95 or 0.98 or even 0.99? (that prompts a what/when is 1.0, I'll start a separate thread about that) ...ant What/when is 1.0? Good question :) There has been a lot of progress in the recent 0.90 and 0.91 releases and I agree that Tuscany SCA is getting close to a 1.0 release. So, let's start discussing What is Tuscany 1.0. I'm moving this thread to the tuscany-user list as I'd like to get feedback, requests and ideas from Tuscany users. Speaking for myself, here's some thoughts on what I'm interested in having in a 1.0 release: * SCA assembly spec 1.0 support Looks close to complete here, I think it just needs a little more testing and a simple implementation of a distributed domain. Simon seems to be making good progress in that area. Also I'd like to have a simple admin console to add/remove contributions and composites and allocate components to nodes. * SCA Policy framework 1.0 Modules policy and policy-xml are taking shape. Having one concrete policy like Security implemented on top the framework would be good. Maybe Venkat could give his thoughts on this? * Extension points for component implementations, bindings, databindings and policies
Re: Contents of Tuscany SCA 1.0 release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
On 8/6/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Bringing this thread up again as time is ticking on if we want to get a release out this month. How would people feel about taking a branch for this release in a bit less than 2 weeks, say aiming for the 14/15th of August? That should just about give enough time for clean up and voting to get a release out by the end of August. Another thing I wondered about was the name, we've been talking about this being 0.92, how about something higher to show we're getting closer, maybe 0.95 or 0.98 or even 0.99? (that prompts a what/when is 1.0, I'll start a separate thread about that) ...ant What/when is 1.0? Good question :) There has been a lot of progress in the recent 0.90 and 0.91 releases and I agree that Tuscany SCA is getting close to a 1.0 release. So, let's start discussing What is Tuscany 1.0. I'm moving this thread to the tuscany-user list as I'd like to get feedback, requests and ideas from Tuscany users. Speaking for myself, here's some thoughts on what I'm interested in having in a 1.0 release: * SCA assembly spec 1.0 support Looks close to complete here, I think it just needs a little more testing and a simple implementation of a distributed domain. Simon seems to be making good progress in that area. Also I'd like to have a simple admin console to add/remove contributions and composites and allocate components to nodes. * SCA Policy framework 1.0 Modules policy and policy-xml are taking shape. Having one concrete policy like Security implemented on top the framework would be good. Maybe Venkat could give his thoughts on this? * Extension points for component implementations, bindings, databindings and policies SPIs need a little cleanup as they're starting to carry a number of deprecated interfaces/methods. There's no extensibility mechanism for policies yet but it shouldn't be too hard to add that with a pattern similar to the existing extension points. * SCA Java APIs and Annotations 1.0 Almost complete, just missing a complete implementation of ServiceReferences and a few conversational annotations. I'd like to refine the SCADomain.getService() API too. Also, on a separate but related note, a better Java proxy (better than a JDK proxy) would be great, I've seen a Cglib proxy contributed recently, how about extending that idea to all proxies? * Spring component implementation This looks in a good shape. Mike, what else are you planning to do there? * WS binding What is left to do? The SCA Java Releases wiki page lists some work items in this space, which ones do people think should be done for a 1.0 release? * JMS binding Seems to partly work but will need a little more to align with the latest spec. Anybody interested in helping with it? * Feed and JSON bindings IMO important to have to integrate with Web 2.0 apps. The Feed binding is fine as far as I can tell. What do people think remains to be done for the JSON binding? * Scripting component implementation I've been a happy user of implementation.script but have not tried using complex types and much integration with bindings. What's left to be done here? * Geronimo integration I'd like to be able to deploy SCA contributions to Geronimo, looks like there's good progress on that front. I'd also like to support the integration of Webapps in SCA compositions as implementation.web components. * Docs Our architecture docs could use some improvements and cleanup :). For user docs, what do people think about developing more tutorials and variations around the Online Store tutorial? * Samples Some of them need minor cleanup. Are we missing samples in any specific area? * Other implementation and binding extensions We have starters or partial support for implementation.notification, implementation.bpel, binding.ejb, binding.rmi, implementation.osgi. Could people help get these extensions in the release? Thoughts? Anything people would like to discuss and get included in Tuscany SCA 1.0, please bring it up... -- Jean-Sebastien The simple admin console to add/remove contributions etc sounds good, i'd quite like that to work with the webapp distribution - what do people think about having the webapp distribution? I think its good and makes all the things like the multiple contribution support make more sense and easier to use, most other similar projects have a war distribution - axis2, synapse, servicemix, mule etc, but do we want this? Not sure supporting every corner of all the SCA spec's is necessary for a Tuscany 1.0, if we do fine, but i think its more important that Tuscany SCA just does useful things and is useable, so +1 to things like improving the diagnostics and error handling story, and to making things more easy to use. Getting some resolution and consistency on the binding URIs that has being discussed on other threads would be part of that, as would
Re: Contents of Tuscany SCA 1.0 release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
On 8/6/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Bringing this thread up again as time is ticking on if we want to get a release out this month. How would people feel about taking a branch for this release in a bit less than 2 weeks, say aiming for the 14/15th of August? That should just about give enough time for clean up and voting to get a release out by the end of August. Another thing I wondered about was the name, we've been talking about this being 0.92, how about something higher to show we're getting closer, maybe 0.95 or 0.98 or even 0.99? (that prompts a what/when is 1.0, I'll start a separate thread about that) ...ant What/when is 1.0? Good question :) There has been a lot of progress in the recent 0.90 and 0.91 releases and I agree that Tuscany SCA is getting close to a 1.0 release. So, let's start discussing What is Tuscany 1.0. I'm moving this thread to the tuscany-user list as I'd like to get feedback, requests and ideas from Tuscany users. Speaking for myself, here's some thoughts on what I'm interested in having in a 1.0 release: * SCA assembly spec 1.0 support Looks close to complete here, I think it just needs a little more testing and a simple implementation of a distributed domain. Simon seems to be making good progress in that area. Also I'd like to have a simple admin console to add/remove contributions and composites and allocate components to nodes. * SCA Policy framework 1.0 Modules policy and policy-xml are taking shape. Having one concrete policy like Security implemented on top the framework would be good. Maybe Venkat could give his thoughts on this? * Extension points for component implementations, bindings, databindings and policies SPIs need a little cleanup as they're starting to carry a number of deprecated interfaces/methods. There's no extensibility mechanism for policies yet but it shouldn't be too hard to add that with a pattern similar to the existing extension points. * SCA Java APIs and Annotations 1.0 Almost complete, just missing a complete implementation of ServiceReferences and a few conversational annotations. I'd like to refine the SCADomain.getService() API too. Also, on a separate but related note, a better Java proxy (better than a JDK proxy) would be great, I've seen a Cglib proxy contributed recently, how about extending that idea to all proxies? * Spring component implementation This looks in a good shape. Mike, what else are you planning to do there? * WS binding What is left to do? The SCA Java Releases wiki page lists some work items in this space, which ones do people think should be done for a 1.0 release? * JMS binding Seems to partly work but will need a little more to align with the latest spec. Anybody interested in helping with it? * Feed and JSON bindings IMO important to have to integrate with Web 2.0 apps. The Feed binding is fine as far as I can tell. What do people think remains to be done for the JSON binding? * Scripting component implementation I've been a happy user of implementation.script but have not tried using complex types and much integration with bindings. What's left to be done here? * Geronimo integration I'd like to be able to deploy SCA contributions to Geronimo, looks like there's good progress on that front. I'd also like to support the integration of Webapps in SCA compositions as implementation.web components. * Docs Our architecture docs could use some improvements and cleanup :). For user docs, what do people think about developing more tutorials and variations around the Online Store tutorial? * Samples Some of them need minor cleanup. Are we missing samples in any specific area? * Other implementation and binding extensions We have starters or partial support for implementation.notification, implementation.bpel, binding.ejb, binding.rmi, implementation.osgi. Could people help get these extensions in the release? Thoughts? Anything people would like to discuss and get included in Tuscany SCA 1.0, please bring it up... -- Jean-Sebastien - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Sebastien, a couple of things from my point of view. Re. * SCA Java APIs and Annotations 1.0 Almost complete, just missing a complete implementation of ServiceReferences and a few conversational annotations. I just opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1511 to bring forward the conversational issues that were recorded as we went through the spec/code a couple of weeks ago. The major parts here are tied up with the overlap between callbacks and conversations which I know the other Simon has been looking at in detail and on the service reference piece which you already mention. Happy to help out with these parts but want to draw a line under the distributed
Re: Contents of Tuscany SCA 1.0 release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
Hi Jean-Sebastien, where is the SCA Java Releases wiki page which lists some work items in ws binding space, that you mentioned? Thanks, Radim On 8/6/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Bringing this thread up again as time is ticking on if we want to get a release out this month. How would people feel about taking a branch for this release in a bit less than 2 weeks, say aiming for the 14/15th of August? That should just about give enough time for clean up and voting to get a release out by the end of August. Another thing I wondered about was the name, we've been talking about this being 0.92, how about something higher to show we're getting closer, maybe 0.95 or 0.98 or even 0.99? (that prompts a what/when is 1.0, I'll start a separate thread about that) ...ant What/when is 1.0? Good question :) There has been a lot of progress in the recent 0.90 and 0.91 releases and I agree that Tuscany SCA is getting close to a 1.0 release. So, let's start discussing What is Tuscany 1.0. I'm moving this thread to the tuscany-user list as I'd like to get feedback, requests and ideas from Tuscany users. Speaking for myself, here's some thoughts on what I'm interested in having in a 1.0 release: * SCA assembly spec 1.0 support Looks close to complete here, I think it just needs a little more testing and a simple implementation of a distributed domain. Simon seems to be making good progress in that area. Also I'd like to have a simple admin console to add/remove contributions and composites and allocate components to nodes. * SCA Policy framework 1.0 Modules policy and policy-xml are taking shape. Having one concrete policy like Security implemented on top the framework would be good. Maybe Venkat could give his thoughts on this? * Extension points for component implementations, bindings, databindings and policies SPIs need a little cleanup as they're starting to carry a number of deprecated interfaces/methods. There's no extensibility mechanism for policies yet but it shouldn't be too hard to add that with a pattern similar to the existing extension points. * SCA Java APIs and Annotations 1.0 Almost complete, just missing a complete implementation of ServiceReferences and a few conversational annotations. I'd like to refine the SCADomain.getService() API too. Also, on a separate but related note, a better Java proxy (better than a JDK proxy) would be great, I've seen a Cglib proxy contributed recently, how about extending that idea to all proxies? * Spring component implementation This looks in a good shape. Mike, what else are you planning to do there? * WS binding What is left to do? The SCA Java Releases wiki page lists some work items in this space, which ones do people think should be done for a 1.0 release? * JMS binding Seems to partly work but will need a little more to align with the latest spec. Anybody interested in helping with it? * Feed and JSON bindings IMO important to have to integrate with Web 2.0 apps. The Feed binding is fine as far as I can tell. What do people think remains to be done for the JSON binding? * Scripting component implementation I've been a happy user of implementation.script but have not tried using complex types and much integration with bindings. What's left to be done here? * Geronimo integration I'd like to be able to deploy SCA contributions to Geronimo, looks like there's good progress on that front. I'd also like to support the integration of Webapps in SCA compositions as implementation.web components. * Docs Our architecture docs could use some improvements and cleanup :). For user docs, what do people think about developing more tutorials and variations around the Online Store tutorial? * Samples Some of them need minor cleanup. Are we missing samples in any specific area? * Other implementation and binding extensions We have starters or partial support for implementation.notification, implementation.bpel, binding.ejb, binding.rmi, implementation.osgi. Could people help get these extensions in the release? Thoughts? Anything people would like to discuss and get included in Tuscany SCA 1.0, please bring it up... -- Jean-Sebastien - 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]
Re: Contents of Tuscany SCA 1.0 release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/SCA+Java+Next+Release+Contentshttp://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/SCA+Java+Next+Release+Contents Note that its likely we wont have time to get everything listed there done in 1.0 so please say which things are important to you to help us prioritize what does get done. ...ant On 8/7/07, Radim Kolarik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Jean-Sebastien, where is the SCA Java Releases wiki page which lists some work items in ws binding space, that you mentioned? Thanks, Radim On 8/6/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Bringing this thread up again as time is ticking on if we want to get a release out this month. How would people feel about taking a branch for this release in a bit less than 2 weeks, say aiming for the 14/15th of August? That should just about give enough time for clean up and voting to get a release out by the end of August. Another thing I wondered about was the name, we've been talking about this being 0.92, how about something higher to show we're getting closer, maybe 0.95 or 0.98 or even 0.99? (that prompts a what/when is 1.0, I'll start a separate thread about that) ...ant What/when is 1.0? Good question :) There has been a lot of progress in the recent 0.90 and 0.91 releases and I agree that Tuscany SCA is getting close to a 1.0 release. So, let's start discussing What is Tuscany 1.0. I'm moving this thread to the tuscany-user list as I'd like to get feedback, requests and ideas from Tuscany users. Speaking for myself, here's some thoughts on what I'm interested in having in a 1.0 release: * SCA assembly spec 1.0 support Looks close to complete here, I think it just needs a little more testing and a simple implementation of a distributed domain. Simon seems to be making good progress in that area. Also I'd like to have a simple admin console to add/remove contributions and composites and allocate components to nodes. * SCA Policy framework 1.0 Modules policy and policy-xml are taking shape. Having one concrete policy like Security implemented on top the framework would be good. Maybe Venkat could give his thoughts on this? * Extension points for component implementations, bindings, databindings and policies SPIs need a little cleanup as they're starting to carry a number of deprecated interfaces/methods. There's no extensibility mechanism for policies yet but it shouldn't be too hard to add that with a pattern similar to the existing extension points. * SCA Java APIs and Annotations 1.0 Almost complete, just missing a complete implementation of ServiceReferences and a few conversational annotations. I'd like to refine the SCADomain.getService() API too. Also, on a separate but related note, a better Java proxy (better than a JDK proxy) would be great, I've seen a Cglib proxy contributed recently, how about extending that idea to all proxies? * Spring component implementation This looks in a good shape. Mike, what else are you planning to do there? * WS binding What is left to do? The SCA Java Releases wiki page lists some work items in this space, which ones do people think should be done for a 1.0 release? * JMS binding Seems to partly work but will need a little more to align with the latest spec. Anybody interested in helping with it? * Feed and JSON bindings IMO important to have to integrate with Web 2.0 apps. The Feed binding is fine as far as I can tell. What do people think remains to be done for the JSON binding? * Scripting component implementation I've been a happy user of implementation.script but have not tried using complex types and much integration with bindings. What's left to be done here? * Geronimo integration I'd like to be able to deploy SCA contributions to Geronimo, looks like there's good progress on that front. I'd also like to support the integration of Webapps in SCA compositions as implementation.web components. * Docs Our architecture docs could use some improvements and cleanup :). For user docs, what do people think about developing more tutorials and variations around the Online Store tutorial? * Samples Some of them need minor cleanup. Are we missing samples in any specific area? * Other implementation and binding extensions We have starters or partial support for implementation.notification, implementation.bpel, binding.ejb, binding.rmi, implementation.osgi. Could people help get these extensions in the release? Thoughts? Anything people would like to discuss and get included in Tuscany SCA 1.0, please bring it up... -- Jean-Sebastien - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Contents of Tuscany SCA 1.0 release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
Hi Ant, the top priority regarding web services would be having on fly generation of WSDL, without the need of having to supply own file. Axis2 can do it for its services described in services.xml file. It would also help if there was a working example that would use complex POJO types as parameters and results of a service call, deployed as a web service, as I am struggling to make this work. It is not clear to me if I need to supply services.xml or not for Axis to make complex types working (register serializers/deserializers). Also important are following items in your list, however, not as important as the above issues. The items are ordered by priority. - WS Security - Sort out our WSDL tooling story - get SDO integrated into Axis2? - asynchronous services - conversational services Thanks a lot! Radim On 8/7/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/SCA+Java+Next+Release+Contentshttp://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/SCA+Java+Next+Release+Contents Note that its likely we wont have time to get everything listed there done in 1.0 so please say which things are important to you to help us prioritize what does get done. ...ant On 8/7/07, Radim Kolarik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Jean-Sebastien, where is the SCA Java Releases wiki page which lists some work items in ws binding space, that you mentioned? Thanks, Radim On 8/6/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Bringing this thread up again as time is ticking on if we want to get a release out this month. How would people feel about taking a branch for this release in a bit less than 2 weeks, say aiming for the 14/15th of August? That should just about give enough time for clean up and voting to get a release out by the end of August. Another thing I wondered about was the name, we've been talking about this being 0.92, how about something higher to show we're getting closer, maybe 0.95 or 0.98 or even 0.99? (that prompts a what/when is 1.0, I'll start a separate thread about that) ...ant What/when is 1.0? Good question :) There has been a lot of progress in the recent 0.90 and 0.91 releases and I agree that Tuscany SCA is getting close to a 1.0 release. So, let's start discussing What is Tuscany 1.0. I'm moving this thread to the tuscany-user list as I'd like to get feedback, requests and ideas from Tuscany users. Speaking for myself, here's some thoughts on what I'm interested in having in a 1.0 release: * SCA assembly spec 1.0 support Looks close to complete here, I think it just needs a little more testing and a simple implementation of a distributed domain. Simon seems to be making good progress in that area. Also I'd like to have a simple admin console to add/remove contributions and composites and allocate components to nodes. * SCA Policy framework 1.0 Modules policy and policy-xml are taking shape. Having one concrete policy like Security implemented on top the framework would be good. Maybe Venkat could give his thoughts on this? * Extension points for component implementations, bindings, databindings and policies SPIs need a little cleanup as they're starting to carry a number of deprecated interfaces/methods. There's no extensibility mechanism for policies yet but it shouldn't be too hard to add that with a pattern similar to the existing extension points. * SCA Java APIs and Annotations 1.0 Almost complete, just missing a complete implementation of ServiceReferences and a few conversational annotations. I'd like to refine the SCADomain.getService() API too. Also, on a separate but related note, a better Java proxy (better than a JDK proxy) would be great, I've seen a Cglib proxy contributed recently, how about extending that idea to all proxies? * Spring component implementation This looks in a good shape. Mike, what else are you planning to do there? * WS binding What is left to do? The SCA Java Releases wiki page lists some work items in this space, which ones do people think should be done for a 1.0 release? * JMS binding Seems to partly work but will need a little more to align with the latest spec. Anybody interested in helping with it? * Feed and JSON bindings IMO important to have to integrate with Web 2.0 apps. The Feed binding is fine as far as I can tell. What do people think remains to be done for the JSON binding? * Scripting component implementation I've been a happy user of implementation.script but have not tried using complex types and much integration with bindings. What's left to be done here? * Geronimo integration I'd like to be able to deploy SCA contributions to Geronimo, looks like there's good progress on that front. I'd also like
Re: Distributed domain support in 0.92 was: SCA 0.92 release?
On 7/24/07, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To get the distributed domain support up to a level that is suitable for including in the next release I think we need to make the node configuration and management more dynamic. Scenarios -- The current scenario being used to test distributed support is the calculator-distributed sample where the CalculatorComponent runs in nodeA and the AddComponent and SubtractComponent run on NodeB and NodeC respectively. This is a simple stand alone application and I think we should continue with it. There has also been conversation on the list about how the distributed domain can help when working in a web app environment. What are the salient points here we need to consider? SCA Binding -- Currently the code uses JMS to implement the default remote SCA binding. The remote SCA binding is used when the system finds that two components that are wired together locally are deployed to separate Nodes. As an alternative it would be good to support web services here also and have this fit in with the new SCA binding mechanism that Simon Nash has been working on. To make a web services SCA binding work we need an EndpointLookup interface so that components out there in the distributed domain can locate other components that they are wired to. Node Management --- Currently each node runs in isolation and starts a local SCA domain configured from .topology and .composite files. It would be good to define NodeMaganement interfaces so that this information can be provided remotely and so that the node can expose remotely accessible management interfaces, for example. Join a domain Start/Stop domains and components in domains Retrieve domain topology and topology changes relevant to the node Retrieve default domain URIs for this node Record any events that occur in the domain (could be offered as a feed) The domain management interface Ant has recently been added that may help us shape this. Also Sebastien's work to allow local domains to be modified more dynamically should help make this work. Distributed Domain Management --- The notion of a distributed domain running across a series of nodes gives us the opportunity to provide some centralized control, for example Accept configuration changes Notify interested nodes/domains that configuration changes are available Record the endpoints of services offered by each Node/Domain Collect together events that occur in nodes (again could be offered as a feed) For both NodeManagment and DistributedDomainManagement, SCA itself seems to provide a good foundation for implementing the various management services that are required. This is how the implementation to date implements its component registry. Defining such components allows us to provide different implementations, for example, we could retain the file based management we have now for batch operation and create network based management components for dynamic runtime environments. Anyhow, if anyone has any thoughts about what is required or wants to get involved in moving this forward then you are most welcome Simon A few more thoughts I am building a few interfaces to formalize the messages involved in getting the distributed runtime going in its more dynamic guise. Generally I want to accommodate the case where the nodes of the distributed domain can run based either on configuration from file or from a central distributed domain management function. So I want the interfaces to be implementable in each node or to be proxyable to a distributed domain management function. The flexibility in the way that the distributed domain runs should be achievable by choosing different implementations for the management components. I say should as I don't have an end to end demo working of this dynamic approach yet. All help gratefully received;-) SCABinding -- Ant has started work on making the WebService binding work without WSDL which will make the work on getting the remote SCABinding up much easier. For endpoint discovery we need something like ServiceDiscovery - FindServiceEndpoint(distributedDomainUri, serviceName) - RegisterServiceEndpoint(distributedDomainUri, serviceName, url) This could also be bought into play in the special case of each Node discovering the endpoint of the distributed domain management function. In the case where that configuration is not available locally you would expect a remote endpoint to be provided Node Management --- The minimum interface for node management could look something like Node - start(nodeName) - stop() - JoinDomain(distrbutedDomainUri) - DomainNodeConfigurationChange(distributedDomainUri) So the node operation can be started or stopped. Starting a node would cause it to go and discover
Distributed domain support in 0.92 was: SCA 0.92 release?
To get the distributed domain support up to a level that is suitable for including in the next release I think we need to make the node configuration and management more dynamic. Scenarios -- The current scenario being used to test distributed support is the calculator-distributed sample where the CalculatorComponent runs in nodeA and the AddComponent and SubtractComponent run on NodeB and NodeC respectively. This is a simple stand alone application and I think we should continue with it. There has also been conversation on the list about how the distributed domain can help when working in a web app environment. What are the salient points here we need to consider? SCA Binding -- Currently the code uses JMS to implement the default remote SCA binding. The remote SCA binding is used when the system finds that two components that are wired together locally are deployed to separate Nodes. As an alternative it would be good to support web services here also and have this fit in with the new SCA binding mechanism that Simon Nash has been working on. To make a web services SCA binding work we need an EndpointLookup interface so that components out there in the distributed domain can locate other components that they are wired to. Node Management --- Currently each node runs in isolation and starts a local SCA domain configured from .topology and .composite files. It would be good to define NodeMaganement interfaces so that this information can be provided remotely and so that the node can expose remotely accessible management interfaces, for example. Join a domain Start/Stop domains and components in domains Retrieve domain topology and topology changes relevant to the node Retrieve default domain URIs for this node Record any events that occur in the domain (could be offered as a feed) The domain management interface Ant has recently been added that may help us shape this. Also Sebastien's work to allow local domains to be modified more dynamically should help make this work. Distributed Domain Management --- The notion of a distributed domain running across a series of nodes gives us the opportunity to provide some centralized control, for example Accept configuration changes Notify interested nodes/domains that configuration changes are available Record the endpoints of services offered by each Node/Domain Collect together events that occur in nodes (again could be offered as a feed) For both NodeManagment and DistributedDomainManagement, SCA itself seems to provide a good foundation for implementing the various management services that are required. This is how the implementation to date implements its component registry. Defining such components allows us to provide different implementations, for example, we could retain the file based management we have now for batch operation and create network based management components for dynamic runtime environments. Anyhow, if anyone has any thoughts about what is required or wants to get involved in moving this forward then you are most welcome Simon
Re: SCA 0.92 release?
Posting to tuscany-user list as well to get input. Any real world scenarios/samples that can be shared by users? It would be great if we could start building a library of tips and real usage examples.. a knowledge base. Thanks Haleh On 7/2/07, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/2/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/2/07, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/2/07, Venkata Krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I am looking at the Policy Framework and shall update the wiki on the specifics soon. Once this is done to some level, I'd also like to help a bit with the ws-* things (may be WS-Security to start with) that Ant has listed on the wiki page. - Venkat On 6/30/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With the SCA 0.91 release now being voted on how about starting on 0.92? I've already been adding some things I'm interested in getting done to the next release wiki page - http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANY/Java+SCA+Next+Release+Contents- so far thats mainly related to improving web services functionality. So anyone else interested in helping with an 0.92 release or have any function they'd like to suggest or add to the wiki page? How does aiming for getting it done 4 - 6 weeks again sound? ...ant The above link has an extrenuous - on the end. Taking that off gets me to the page. Can we move this information across the to the new wiki space ( http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/Home) so that everyone (including non committers) can add to it? I'm working on the next phase of the distributed runtime which I want to get into the next release. This involves a few items. SCA Binding Topology model Distributed domain Node implementation Management assembly Also I need some of the ws items, in particular the ability to run without wsdl, so can help out there. We need to do something about logging and events to improvide runtime usability. We've talked about it before but not done anything yet. Ties into the management assembly. I'd also like to see the JMS binding in the release but can't commit to doing lots more work on including spec features. It's been working fine for me in my limited synchronous/rpc model. If I get time I'll take a look to see what it will take to add minimum asynch support but if anyone else fancies having a go at this then it's a good way to learn about Tuscany extensions. All these sound good, but its starting to sound a lot to get done in just a few weeks. How does the suggesting timeframe of 4 or so weeks sound? We'd talked once about having a release specifically targeting things like logging, events, and error handling. I'd still like to do that, if anyone wants to start now thats great but I doubt I'd have much time to help this release. ...ant I think 4 weeks is a bit too short. Given that we are getting into holday season I like the sound of 6 weeks better. I agree there is a lot there but in the spirit of your WS list I wasn't proposing that all of it gets done. I do think we need to make a start on the logging/errors sooner rather than later though even if it doesn't get into the next release. I'll offer my effort to help move it along once the distributed work starts drawing to a close. Simon
Re: SCA 0.92 release?
Now that we are going to have a DAS release out, I'd like to plan to have implementation.das and implementation.data available for the next release. I also like to have some improvements to the Contribution Services, such as import/export and other scenarios that have been described on the list recently. I'll update the wiki with these items. On 7/2/07, haleh mahbod [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Posting to tuscany-user list as well to get input. Any real world scenarios/samples that can be shared by users? It would be great if we could start building a library of tips and real usage examples.. a knowledge base. Thanks Haleh On 7/2/07, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/2/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/2/07, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/2/07, Venkata Krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I am looking at the Policy Framework and shall update the wiki on the specifics soon. Once this is done to some level, I'd also like to help a bit with the ws-* things (may be WS-Security to start with) that Ant has listed on the wiki page. - Venkat On 6/30/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With the SCA 0.91 release now being voted on how about starting on 0.92? I've already been adding some things I'm interested in getting done to the next release wiki page - http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANY/Java+SCA+Next+Release+Contents- so far thats mainly related to improving web services functionality. So anyone else interested in helping with an 0.92 release or have any function they'd like to suggest or add to the wiki page? How does aiming for getting it done 4 - 6 weeks again sound? ...ant The above link has an extrenuous - on the end. Taking that off gets me to the page. Can we move this information across the to the new wiki space ( http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/Home) so that everyone (including non committers) can add to it? I'm working on the next phase of the distributed runtime which I want to get into the next release. This involves a few items. SCA Binding Topology model Distributed domain Node implementation Management assembly Also I need some of the ws items, in particular the ability to run without wsdl, so can help out there. We need to do something about logging and events to improvide runtime usability. We've talked about it before but not done anything yet. Ties into the management assembly. I'd also like to see the JMS binding in the release but can't commit to doing lots more work on including spec features. It's been working fine for me in my limited synchronous/rpc model. If I get time I'll take a look to see what it will take to add minimum asynch support but if anyone else fancies having a go at this then it's a good way to learn about Tuscany extensions. All these sound good, but its starting to sound a lot to get done in just a few weeks. How does the suggesting timeframe of 4 or so weeks sound? We'd talked once about having a release specifically targeting things like logging, events, and error handling. I'd still like to do that, if anyone wants to start now thats great but I doubt I'd have much time to help this release. ...ant I think 4 weeks is a bit too short. Given that we are getting into holday season I like the sound of 6 weeks better. I agree there is a lot there but in the spirit of your WS list I wasn't proposing that all of it gets done. I do think we need to make a start on the logging/errors sooner rather than later though even if it doesn't get into the next release. I'll offer my effort to help move it along once the distributed work starts drawing to a close. Simon -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany Committer http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
