Hi Göktürk, On 19 oct. 2011, at 06:35, Göktürk Gezer wrote:
> Hi Emmanuel, > > I'm doing some experiments on DS. I saw some problems on our way. Before > diving deeper i must consult you about somethings. > > I'm changing the way we deal with schema > elements(LdapComparator,Normalizer,SyntaxChecker) so that they will be > pluggable. Schema manager tries to classload them that's where i'm going to > change. I'll make SchemaManager get them through OSGI, but while i change the > core parts, there are lots of place on the code that use them as tool(Tests > espacially). Although I'm 100% positive to move ApacheDS as a whole into OSGI, I'm *really* not sure the LDAP API should rely on OSGI features for it's extensibility. As an API, it's meant to be used by many third party developers and I personally think we can't afford to be only compatible with OSGI. I'm afraid we still need to support the API as a set of simple jars (that's why we added the 'standalone' project at the time with Alex, supporting both OSGI and non-OSGI environments). > And once the class is manipulated with IPojo, it is not so easy to > instantiate it through normal ways. Before solving that topic i must know > what do you think about below issues: > > 1- Tests are using them heavily. So changing the way we load them will broke > these unit tests. So we must change them to be OSGI compatible. I'm talking > aside from OSGI integration tests. These changes will make these unit tests > unable to run without OSGI.(Pax-Exam will be used most probably) Indeed, the framework will need, just like the ApacheDS service project, to start it's own embedded OSGI container (Felix or Karaf) and launch the server through it. > 2- Because more than one instances of the ApacheDS may be launched inside > same JVM. We must either provide same copies of these schema elements to all > instances or we must create separate ones for each one. They are separated > between instances at that moment because of the class load approach, but as > far as i see no context information is kept in those elements. So we can > share them between ApacheDS instances. What do you think? I not sure these can be shared between ApacheDS instances. Two instances can have very different schemas (with schema elements having different 'enabled' states from one instance to the other for example). > 3- How Studio is interacting with that elements. This is the most important > question actually. Because these elements are in shared, every main change > will affect Studio too. For what purposes these elements are being used by > Studio? There are many places where Studio uses the LDAP API (Shared) classes. If we're talking only about schema elements, they are heavily uses in the LDAP Browser (when loading the schema from the remote connection) and in the SchemaEditor. We're also using some ApacheDS classes (which work fine via OSGI, before when I rebranded ApacheDS jars as bundled, and also now that they are real bundles), especially the configuration classes for ApacheDS and the core partition classes. ApacheDS dependencies are only used in the ApacheDS *2.0* Configuration Editor. Regards, Pierre-Arnaud > Regards, > Gokturk
