On Nov 1, 2012, at 11:01 , Bob Dionne <[email protected]> wrote:
> Reminds me of my favorite book - "Sketches of an Elephant" > > Jan, thanks for putting a stake in the ground, I've wanted to see this > forever. The proposal in my mind takes too much of a product management or > marketing view (perhaps knowingly). Here's how it will look the buttons one > will push, etc.. Totally knowingly, intentional even. > I think the "what" and "how it works" are important to decide on first, .eg. > @rnewson's suggestion for something like RabbitMQ. Reading the docs for that, > the "what" is much clearer. This seems contradictory to your previous statement. My document started the "what" and "how it works" discussion just fine. Whatever is unclear needs to be resolved *before* we jump into any implementation. > Looking over the efforts to date, couchdb-lucene, and geocouch, these two are > quite different in terms of design, one is roughly loosely coupled, the other > more native (in the same VM). Yup, we need to define how this fits into the plugin system. Maybe we never to something like couchdb-lucene, maybe we do native plugins first, and external plugins later, or the other way around. Thanks for making this more explicit, I will add this to the document. > A plugin architecture, in my mind, should emerge from the code refactoring > and layout we're currently discussing. I respectfully disagree. I would like to start from the user and work my way down. What ever internal refactorings make sense to support the use-case, we will have to make. I trust that we are smart enough to make this in a way that is favourable to the rest of the code base. I definitely want to stress that I’d like to define the plugin feature from the user down, not from the technology up. This doesn’t mean we’ll bend over backwards to accommodate some crazy concept we draw up, but I think it helps keeping in mind who we do this for is great for making informed decisions rather than what’s easier for the code we have today. > We should ask and answer questions such as: > > 1. the role of externals > > 2 access to the storage layer (API?) > > 3. separation from http layer > > 4. support for code upgrades > > 5. balancing of resources > > I didn't mention Auth and Logging as I think these are separate in terms of > concerns, more system oriented. Whereas geocouch and couchdb-lucene are > actually extending the functionality in meaningful ways. Excellent observations and points! Cheers Jan -- > > > On Nov 1, 2012, at 5:30 AM, Simon Metson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 - keep it simple for the first iteration. >> >> >> On Wednesday, 31 October 2012 at 23:40, Robert Newson wrote: >> >>> I quite like the rabbitmq approach (a lot like the apache httpd approach). >>> you can enable/disable/list plugins but the tool doesn't include the >>> downloading and managed repository bits, which is a huge rabbit hole (pun >>> intended). >> >> >> >
