>From the fiew documentation available, XBean seems to be a container for jsr250-based components, with plugability for various IoC containers.
The "discover, download and install" plugin model seems to be very similar to OSGi, and the link to Eclipse Equinox makes me suppose it's OSGi based under the hood. This looks very similar to Spring-DM + Equinox, with support for multiple IoC containers. If maven only needs jsr-250 + custom annotations, it could be IoC container agnostic, beeing Spring or anything else with same features. > I also have never bought the argument that what's popular is what's best. Maven wouldn't exist if that were the > case. There's always room for competitors. beeing the most popular is not a technical argument, but this is to be considered : 1. the leader may not be technicaly stupid, beeing the leader 2. when used as a service, the documentation / good knoledge from developer community is IMHO a big element to consider. Sorry to say, but I allready had to learn Spring in deep, some limited Plexus, and now OSGi, I won't look more at XBean until it gets mainly used or comes with highly innovative features. I agrea there is always room for competitors and that's a good thing to see people come with new ideas and projects, but just some "nice" features is not enough for me to choose a software, as what maven expect from it's container is limited to simple IoC (no AOP, declarative TX, bytecode instrumentation...) and advanced classloader/plugability. Only the second criteria can help the choice, and OSGi seems to be the most promising technology. About "Maven wouldn't exist if that were the case", please remember Maven1 was desinged as a "let's share common ANT scripts" and envolved on this basis, and Maven2 was a "lets take what was good in M1 and make it stronger". You never build from scratch, but allways start from what is considered good. Today, what is considered good is - about IoC : to be non-intrusive (plexus IS intrusive, as LogEnabled demonstrates in most of classes) and to be compliant with the fiew existing standards (JSR250 or other). - about plugin-based-architecture : hot deployment, replacement and concurrent versionning, with OSGI as the only recognized candidate (as JSR for "java modules" is still WIP) Nicolas. 2008/5/2 Jesse McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > http://geronimo.apache.org/xbean > > On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:04 PM, Hilco Wijbenga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > <snip/> > > > > > And ultimately the container DI is not the important part but the > > > implementations of our components. Using standard annotations for > that is a > > > good thing and that's not hard. XBR does full JEE injection and can > manage > > > any sort of annotation based DI because it's entirely agnostic. At > any rate > > > full support for that is now possible with XBR. > > > > XBR? I did some googling but all I could find (aside from lots of TVs) > > was a reference to an apparently brand new Maven 2.1 project. No > > website or anything. Where can I find more information? > > > > Cheers, > > Hilco > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > -- > jesse mcconnell > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
