Comments inline.
Thanks,
Raymond
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Simon Laws" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 8:27 AM
To: "tuscany-dev" <[email protected]>
Subject: [2.x] modules/endpoint structure and naming
This is motivated by me wanting to run different itests with different
versions of the endpoint registry.
I want to split the endpoint registry implementation out of
modules/endpoint and call it endpoint-registry-local
Why don't we just move the local endpoint registry into core as the default
implementation. We have quite a few cases like this: a built-in
implementation of the "System Utility" is provided and they can be replaced
by adding an extension module (with higher ranking).
Based on this I would then rename endpoint-tribes to be
endpoint-registry-tribes. We could have other implementations based on
this pattern.
Maybe we can even name it as "tuscany-distributed-tribes".
That would leave endpoint with just EndpointReferenceBuilder. Which is
there currently as it's pluggable. I suggest we leave it as is until
we have the binding and policy match part done. We may then we able to
move it elsewhere.
IMO, it should go into core too.
Thoughts?
Simon
