Guys,
How about using this as an opportunity to sit down and define the Geronimo/JCA API from your two different perspectives so that we end up with two pluggable impls ?
Then we have a level playing field upon which any JCA impl can play, to the benefit of the whole community.
Just my penniesworth - I've been there with Jetty & Tomcat...
Jules
Bruce Snyder wrote:
This one time, at band camp, David Jencks said:
DJ>Gianny Damour and I have developed alternate partial implementations of DJ>the JCA ConnectionManager. We haven't been able to convince each other DJ>of the merits of our own approach, so I think we need some broader DJ>community review and input. We also need an easier way to further DJ>develop our ideas in public.
DJ>
DJ>What I'd like to do is make 2 branches and check one proposal into DJ>each. I'd like some advice on what to call the branches. Here are a DJ>couple of ideas:
DJ>
DJ>1. Since Gianny's implementation calls most everything a Partition and DJ>mine calls most everything an Interceptor,
DJ>
DJ>J2EECA_PARTITION
DJ>
DJ>and
DJ>
DJ>J2EECA_INTERCEPTOR
DJ>
DJ>2. Use our initials...
DJ>
DJ>J2EECA_GD
DJ>
DJ>and
DJ>
DJ>J2EECA_DJ
DJ>
DJ>I'm also not sure if it's necessary to be politically correct and call DJ>it J2EECA rather than the usual and inaccurate JCA (== Java DJ>Cryptography Architecture).
DJ>
DJ>If there aren't any objections or better suggestions for names I'll use DJ>proposal (1). After checking in the code I'll explain more why I like DJ>my proposal better.
Interesting that you're bringing this up, David. I was actually going to email you this week to find out your status and how your stuff differs from Gianny's.
I think checking into two branches is a good idea. I like the following branch names:
JCA_PARTITION JCA_INTERCEPTOR
I also think that once this is checked in to CVS, only then can we proceed with a discussion on the mail list debating the merits of each one. If we're debating the two impls on the list without the code, it becomes tougher for everyone involved to truly understand what is being discussed.
Bruce
-- /************************************* * Jules Gosnell * Partner * Core Developers Network (Europe) * http://www.coredevelopers.net *************************************/
