Re: Service and Component Frameworks

[Jun Yang]

David Le Strat wrote:

Bill,

Thanks for pointing this out. It indeed looks quite
interesting.
In terms of choosing a service and component
framework, how will the decision process be handled?
Also, there seems to be at least 3 possible service
framework choices from Apache (Avalon, Hivemind, and
J2 Cornerstone).  We may want to discuss the point
made by Dion earlier in this thread.
1. If Jetspeed decides to go with Cornerstone, it
would be nice to separate the service framework from
the portal project.  The service framework could be
leveraged by many other projects.
 

Rest assured they will be separate.

2. Is there any drive in the Apache community to
leverage a common service framework so that projects
can leverage each other services?
 

I agree the benefits are tremendous.

Jun

I am not sure how the community should address this
but I believe those are quite important points as we
move forward.  It may (or may not) be detrimental to
Jetspeed to lock itself in a Jetspeed specific service
framework.  We should at least discuss and understand
the implication of such a move.
Thoughts?

David.

--- Barnhill William <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 

For #5, has anyone looked into connecting the WSIF
project ( 
http://ws.apache.org/wsif/ ) into Cornerstone as a
service factory? And 
what does everyone think about the advisability of
doing that?

Bill

David Le Strat wrote:

   

Scott,

I agree with you on those. A couple more features
could be:
5. The service framework provides the ability to
     

web
   

service enable services.

6. The service framework provides the ability to
monitor the services performance.
I am not sure what others think but I feel that
     

some
   

type of interceptor framework would be quite
important.
Regards,

David.

--- "Weaver, Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

     

What would be the key features that we would be
looking for?
    

         

This is me speaking, but I am sure others feel the
same:
1.  Transparent JMX management of deployed
       

modules.
   

2.  Hot deploy and hot configuration.  No more
       

stop
   

container, change 
  property(ies), restart container, wash, rinse,
repeat.  Gawd, that's a  
  HUGE PITA!
3.  The use of POJOs as components would be a nice
feature but isn't really 
  a deal breaker. 
4.  Self-contained deployment either via jar or
       

some
   

other container/archive 
  mechanism.  Each module would have its own
config file included.  No 
  more sifting through unwieldy properties
       

files. 
   

This also makes 
  updating from the CVS easier you don't have to
worry about 
  dif'ing out all the changes you made that will
more than likely conflict
  with the CVS.  You obviously have to perform
some dif'ing, but in 
  smaller more manageable chunks.

Regards,
*================================* 
| Scott T Weaver                 |
| <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>            | 
| Apache Jetspeed Portal Project |
| Apache Pluto Portlet Container |
*================================*

  

       

-----Original Message-----
From: David Le Strat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 11:44 AM
To: Jetspeed Developers List
Subject: Re: Service and Component Frameworks
All,

There is a lot of good info comparing the
    

         

differences
  

       

between frameworks at:

    

         

http://wiki.apache.org/geronimo/Architecture_2fKernel
   



     

Regarding Hivemind, Howard gave a presentation a
    

         

while
  

       

back, some more info on Hivemind can be found at:

    

         

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg08269.html
   



     

It is a neat framework and hopefully the
    

         

intellectual
  

       

property issue will be resolved soon.  I
    

         

especially
  

       

like the clean interceptor model.  The
    

         

substitution
  

       

model would also be quite handy to create clean
separated modules and substitute common
    

         

configuration
  

from a central configuration point. Finally
       

    

         

Hivedoc is
  

       

quite nice in providing a clear picture of the
dependencies between modules.
Another interesting approach (which is the
    

         

approach
  

       

taken by ExoPortal for instance) would be to
    

         

combine
  

       

AOP with Pico container or Avalon (Merlin seems
         

to
   

    

         

be
  

       

the recommended service framework).

Lots of choices out there.

What would be the key features that we would be
looking for?
Regards,

David.

--- David Sean Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
    

         

wrote:
  

       

Im starting a little informal thread discussing
Service and Component
Frameworks.
Currently we are using Fulcrum in Jetspeed-2.
While I do like Fulcrum and it has been very
      

           

useful
  

       

for us, there are
now more advanced service frameworks available.
All services in J2 are implemented as Common
      

           

=== message truncated ===
 



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]