On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 11:43, Magesh Umasankar wrote: > I have been spending some time now on the VFS > layer... Nothing major to report yet, but I just wanted > to sound off so that if I am going down the wrong > route, I correct it right away.
kool. I wouldn't mind seeing it checked into CVS just so we can browse your progress aswell ;) > 3. JNDI, by far, beats the above to, in my > evaluation. It is generic enough. We don't have > any licensing issues. It has also become part of > the core JRE (1.4 onwards). Technically, it fits to a T > what we are looking for - virtual file system that > provides search controls, access attributes, > url mounting, etc. Furthermore, there's been > some ground work already done for us at Jakarta/Apache > (Catalina). I have written a SPI for a FTPFileSystem > - though it is in a real crude stage right now. I believe > this is the way to go because Ant's code would be > operating at the (Dir)Context level and we can keep > adding SPIs as we need them. Furthermore, > JNDI has been stable for quite sometime now and > we can depend on a widely used API. JNDI is nice. It will be slower - a lot slower - and a bit more memory hungry ... whether this is an issue or not is another thing altogether. You may want to check out org.apache.avalon.excalibur.naming in the jakarta-avalon-excalibur CVS. It is a framework for writing JNDI providers. In actually used it to provide a File based Context a while back. > Let me know if my approach, so far, to go the JNDI > route seems reasonable. hard to say at this stage. Just keep experimenting and checking stuff into CVS and we can see where it goes. -- Cheers, Pete *----------------------------------------------* | The best defense against logic is ignorance. | *----------------------------------------------* -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
