Hi all,
regarding configuration with the server.xml file: The current solution
is still not perfect; it simplifies the file a lot, but some things are
really complicated to accomplish.
I have started to documented it in the Basic User's Guide, but I
stopped, because I still hope for some improvements before finalization
in the 2.0 Providing a context entry for instance is definitely not
acceptable for our users.
This is a fragment of the current style (perhaps I have missed something):
---
<spring:bean id="systemContextEntry"
class="org.springframework.beans.factory.config.MethodInvokingFactoryBean">
<spring:property name="targetObject"><spring:ref
local='directoryService'/></spring:property>
<spring:property
name="targetMethod"><spring:value>newEntry</spring:value></spring:property>
<spring:property name="arguments">
<spring:list>
<spring:value xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans";>
objectClass: top
objectClass: organizationalUnit
objectClass: extensibleObject
ou: system
</spring:value>
<spring:value>ou=system</spring:value>
</spring:list>
</spring:property>
</spring:bean>
---
Note that also need a custom Editor for Attributes to be configured.
Defining your own partition is at least hard with that. It is not
possible to leave the context entry out, it won't work (NPE).
Question: Is it possible to change the partition implementation that it
works without providing an initial context entry in the configuration?
In this case, the user has to add the "root entry" with a tool/LDIF load
after starting the server with a new partition the first time, but this
seems acceptable for me.
The configuration would become much easier then.
Another thing I was thinking about was creating our own namespace like
described here:
http://www.theserverside.com/tt/articles/article.tss?l=CustomNamespacesSpring2
as an alternative to xbean. We would reduce the dependencies, although I
agree that using xbean and its meta data in the javadoc is better than
foreign annotations in our own sources.
Greetings,
Stefan
Alex Karasulu wrote:
Hi David,
Do you see any potential issue with moving to Spring 2.5.x WRT XBean? I
was thinking of upgrading but thought I'd check with you first.
Thanks,
Alex
