- Glenn
On Jan 5, 2004, at 10:35 AM, Weaver, Scott wrote:
Spring also seems to be very bloated out of the box. There is a lot of stuff there that we just don't need or want.
Regards, *================================* | Scott T Weaver | | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | | Apache Jetspeed Portal Project | | Apache Pluto Portlet Container | *================================*
-----Original Message----- From: David Le Strat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 9:46 AM To: Jetspeed Developers List Subject: Re: [J2] Service Framework Proposal
Glenn,
This is the kind of debate we should be having. Spring actually falls into the AOP/IoC realm though Spring is actually much bigger than that as it provides an MVC framework and so on.
If we stick to IoC/AOP, whichever framework is being used, I believe that IoC 2 or 3 are the best choices as you don't need a ServiceManager or JNDI to fetch the dependencies from.
Spring also supports AOP and even has its own AOP implementation.
On the drawbacks side, using Spring you have to provide quite a bit of component metadata (which I don't think is really a big deal, but some people may think so) and we would have to implement JMX support.
Another drawback of Spring seems to be the component configuration itself. It does not seem possible to allow deploying self contained components / self configurable components. Configuration seems to be tight to the web application configuration (through the applicationContext.xml). So you would not be able to package your application services independently of the application. Please correct me if I missed something here.
I have not implemented a service using Spring per say. If we could work around the configuration issue and JMX, Spring could actually be a good fit for Jetspeed. Any comments from others?
Just my 2 cents.
David.
--- "Glenn R. Golden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:David, and Jetspeed all ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the proposal. We are also evaluating component frameworks for our CHEF project, which has been based on Jetspeed 1 and the Jetspeed / Turbine service model, which seems a type 1 IoC like Avalon.
I am currently very interested in Spring's component framework, which can handle type 2 or 3 IoC. You mention it in your analysis, but did not end up recommending using it. Any specific comments of the merits or problems of Spring, in general, and for Jetspeed?
Thanks.
- Glenn
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003 http://search.yahoo.com/top2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
