Dennis: I'll take a fresh look at Rio over the coming week or two. As you know, I've always held the Rio project in high regard. When I looked at it some years ago, I felt it was addressing a number of concerns, like QOS and mobile code, that I didn't have, and hence it seemed complicated for what I was trying to do. But time marches, on, I suppose.
I continue to believe that there's room for a plurality of container concepts. Although it would be great if we could set down a standard for deployment conventions, much like the way JEE does. I'm of the opinion that the com.sun.jini.starter convention leaves a little to be desired. It pretty much assumes that the service is in control of the VM, rather than embrace container-style inversion of control (a-la servlets or EJBs). Greg. On Mon, 2013-05-27 at 12:01, Dennis Reedy wrote: > On May 27, 2013, at 1002AM, Greg Trasuk wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 2013-05-27 at 08:47, Peter Firmstone wrote: > >> Well done Greg, hey I noticed you've got an annotation called Init, this > >> would allow a service to be exported and have any threads started after > >> construction wouldn't it? > >> > > > > Eventually, yes. Right now, the annotations are part of a stripped-down > > dependency-injection framework that sets up all the components that form > > the container itself. (I did have reasons for not using an > > off-the-shelf DI framework - see the AnnotatedClassDeployer source code > > for them). For the record, yes, initialization is a separate operation > > from construction. > > > > One of those components is one or more "deployers" that knows how to > > interpret a given file and startup a service instance. As it stands, > > I've written a deployer that executes services that are written to the > > "com.sun.jini.start" conventions, like Reggie, Outrigger, etc. > > Basically this is so that the container can host all the infrastructure > > services if desired. > > > > Longer-term, I'd like to see a deployer that deploys services written to > > a more developer-friendly convention (that we will need to develop). > > One option for that would be to have a CDI-like framework, where you > > would simply annotate a class with "@Service" or something similar, and > > let the deployer take care of all the startup and publication details. > > > > Historically, my goal has been to make creating a Jini service as easy > > as writing servlets. Nowadays, I think we have to aim for "as easy as > > creating EJBs using CDI", which is arguably pretty easy. > > Apologies for sounding like a broken record, but this was (is) a goal of Rio > as well. All you need is a POJO (and if you like Spring integration thats > available as well). Its really even simpler if you use the Rio Maven > archetype, you get a project generated for you, with test code, and > deployment configuration > (http://www.rio-project.org/tutorial/service/service-intro.html). > > Would it be of interest to discuss how you may take advantage of whats out > there? > > Regards > > Dennis
