Hi all, Is it possible to continue this discussion ?
Following my previous mail, I would like to know if it is ok for everybody. As you can see, the scope is very high and I would like to start more details on the first point : "Graffito Core". Specially, I would like to review together our component-oriented architecture (goals, use cases, list of components, API, ....). In my opinion, we can review later the point b, c, d Let me know if it makes sense for you ! br, Christophe On 2/5/07, Christophe Lombart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Jukka, Let's start to grasp the underlying idea of Graffito. I agree with you to clarify this point. Maybe this is not yet defined. When we will be agree on the Graffito goals, we can try to review together the architecture and see later if we have to split the project or review some parts to be more attractive. I would like to see Graffito as a series of components/services to build ECM applications. that's all :-) In my point of view, we need the following layers : a. "Graffito Core" : all necessary low-level services to define, store, manage, audit, request and search content. If needed, it can give an access to different heterogenous content servers (JCR and propriatary servers). Graffito core have to be extensible. For example, a workflow service could be added into "Graffito Core". b. "Graffito Runtime" : it should be possible to deploy the "Graffito Core" anywhere and customize the components to use. Generally, the "Graffito core" is matching to a content server or a cluster of content server. c. "Graffito Applications" : a series of applications which access to "Graffito Core" to manage a specific kind of content application. Some basic applications can be a simple document management, a forum or a wiki application. Advanced web content management can be also a good example. I think Graffito applications are also components/service based. d. "Graffito portlets" : a series of portlets used to integrate "Graffito applications" into portal like Jetspeed. Is it make sense ? Do you see some point to improve ? If we are agree on the underlying ideas, let's start the technical details. Just one word in point of view of architecture, I'm not the SOA expert but I'm wondering if we can go into this direction. br, Christophe
