On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Simon Laws <simonsl...@googlemail.com> wrote: > I think having a web page to access the domain is a great idea. I'd > like to see a more comprehensive URL space support in the future. For > example, this is what came to mind when I actually sat down and put > pen to paper. >
+1, although the current version of node-manager is a strawman, this is exactly the idea. I also have extra requirements to provide a "service registry" and some minimal documentation to this layer to allow other developers to easily identify what services are available on the domain. > http://somehost:someport/sca/ > {domainname}/ -> get the service document, i.e. > links the following collections > contribution/ -> get a list of installed > contributions (atom/rss?) > {contributionURI}/ -> get the contribution archive (or its URL?) > relative/uri/of/artifact -> get the artifact (see section > 10.4.1) > ?artifact=artifact identifier -> get the artifact > (identifier here could be, e.g. namespace item) > composite/ -> list of all composites in the > contribution (includes deployment time composites) > composite/ -> get a list of available composites > (atom/rss?) > spec/ -> get the domain composite as per the > spec with includes for deployed composites > exploded/ -> get the exploded domain composite as XML > {compositeQName} -> get the .composite file regardless > of whether deployed or not. Could get the GSoC picture here > ?element=xpath -> get that part of the domain > composite as XML using XPath as per policy attachment > node/ -> get the list of running nodes in > the domain (atom/rss?) > {node name} -> get the XML configuration for the named node > endpoint/ -> get the list of all active > endpoints (atom/rss?) > {endpointURI} -> get the XML representation of the > named endpoint > policy/ -> TBD > +1 > I don't really know if that's the optimal design, is complete or if > all of these would be useful as I haven't actually tried it yet. I > started playing in my sandbox and I'll stay there for the time being > as I see that it's been suggested that GSoC pick up node-manager and > I don't want to trample on that. > I should be ok to have all of us contributing to the same node-manager location. > My real objective for thinking these thoughts was to find out if I > could extract this info from the domain registry. Even in simple > testing it's encouraging to see endpoints, composites etc. coming and > going as nodes are started and stopped. > > I note that a node activator extension has been added. What's the > objective of that? I'm starting to think that it will be useful to > have node information shared in the registry. It looks like this > activator is an in-JVM thing though? > The idea of the activator was to be able to attach to the node lifecycle and have a way to register the nodes to the node-manager and then allow it to retrieve node information. -- Luciano Resende http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://twitter.com/lresende1975 http://lresende.blogspot.com/
