On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 1:07 AM, Raymond Feng <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > I start to prototype a XML and Java model to configure SCA nodes to replace > "implementation.node". To facilitate the discussion, I checked in a few java > interfaces and XML files under [1]. > > Basically, we need to provide the following information for a node: > > * The SCA domain URI > * The QName or URI of the node as the id > * A list of SCA contributions used by the node > * The deployment composite > * Base URIs for bindings used by the node > > Please find the xml example at [2]. Some of the things to be further > discussed are added as comments. > > Thoughts? > > Thanks, > Raymond > > [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=773135&view=rev > [2] > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/java/sca/modules/implementation-node/src/test/resources/org/apache/tuscany/sca/node/configuration/node1.xml > Cool, this will be a big help with the Node tidying up. A few comments: Is there a reason this new code is in the old implementation-node module? Its configuring the Node and comparable to the way we do model and XML processors of extensions so seems more natural to just put it in the node-api/impl modules. A node can have multiple deployable composites so this would need to support that. Is there really a use case for a Base URIs per binding? If not then i think we should leave this off here for now. How the base uri works is always causing problems, we've a work item to sort it out in 2.x, and it doesn't work properly in 2.x right now anyway. So it seems like it would be better to not preempt how we fix it by including it here till we know whats going to happen. ...ant
