We definitely need some form of type/function/interface/whatever based
dependencies.
I'm working on a new core framework assembly (little-G without the
containers ... micro-G? ) that we could use as a base for user created
assemblies via plugins. This is really the same item that I think could
solve the assembly proliferation issue (per the recent jetty 5 vs. jetty
6 discussion).
One of the things that would be helpful for this "micro-G" is type based
dependencies as mentioned here. We could then create plugins that had a
requirement on a servlet container without the need to create two or
more plugins for the various container we support). We could also
define plugins that had cardinality rules associated with them (only
install if no other plugin of similar type is installed) so that we
won't end up with 2 web container vying for the same ports, etc...
How we go about doing this is something that I haven't dug into yet but
I think it would require some fundamental changes to the gBean
infrastructure.
Sorry to get so long winded. I hope this is still relevant to the
thread you intended to start David. :-)
Joe
Aaron Mulder wrote:
I sure wouldn't mind if a module could say "I provide javax.foo.Bar"
and a separate module could say "I require a parent that provides
javax.foo.Bar"... As in, interface dependencies instead of name-based
dependencies.
Thanks,
Aaron
On 9/14/06, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I started working on a version of geronimo that uses the jta11
transaction manager in the sandbox. So, I wrote a new transaction
configuration using the new gbean and started trying to assemble a
server. My new config has gbeans with exactly the same names (except
for artifactId) as the old jta 1.0.1B configuration (present in
GERONIMO-2398, please vote). Now it turns out that in order to swap
these configs I am going to need to change almost all the other
configs so they depend on my new one instead of the old one.
This highlights a need for more functional-based dependencies.
Conceptually we kind of want to say, "this module depends on a module
supplying services A, B, C"
One idea I had that might be pretty easy to implement would be to
expand the explicit-versions resolving code a bit so that you can
supply a properties file that says "replace requests for artifactId X
with artifactId Y" and plug it in the the artifact resolver,
configuration, and kernel so that when you ask for a gbean with
artifactId X you get one with the same name map and interfaces but
with artifactId Y. I think of this as aliasing X as Y (or maybe its
vice-versa).
I'm starting to try to implement this since I'm kind of blocked
without something like this... but this might not be the best
possible solution or even the easiest. Anyone want to comment or
suggest better ideas?
thanks
david jencks
