Thanks, I'll look forward to your report ;)

p.s. 
JMX management of services is a very high priority, which was one reason I liked 
Phoenix is that it has built-in JMX management for its components.

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


> -----Original Message-----
> From: BaTien Duong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 2:04 PM
> To: Jetspeed Developers List
> Subject: Re: [JETSPEED 2] Choosing a component framework/micro-kernel
> 
> Weaver, Scott wrote:
> 
> >I have been evaluating component/service/kernel frameworks.  So far, I
> really like what I see in Avalon Phoenix, it seems right down the alley of
> what we are trying to accomplish.  It also has built-in in JMX to manage
> components.
> >
> >I briefly looked at picocontainer, very cool, however it is somewhat
> young where as Phoenix has quite a few projects built upon it, including
> Apache James.  Same goes for Hivemind with respect to being a less mature
> project.
> >
> >I would love if everyone who has used/researched any of these products
> give me a summary of their findings/experiences so as we can make the best
> choice for Jetspeed.
> >
> >
> I had a casual look at HiveMind, SpringFramework, and Pico. My first
> impression is that different frameworks will meet different
> requirements. A flexible, non-intrusive framework is better than a
> rigid, my way or the high way, framework. Different frameworks must live
> together since no single one can be the answer for all architecture
> issues.
> 
> In this sense, HiveMind seems to be better than the one based on Avalon.
> There was some comparison of HiveMind and Avalon by someone who is
> familiar with both, posted on this list sometimes ago. HiveMind fits as
> a centralized registry of services and extension points, which is what
> the portal and portlet containers are.
> 
> Both SpringFramework and Pico seems to design for any arbitrary
> container and can fit as extension point(s) in HiveMind. There is some
> comparion (probably with some bias) between SpringFramework and Pico on
> the SpringFramework site.
> 
> I will spend some more time with HiveMind, especially HiveMind with
> Commons Chain.
> 
> BaTien
> DBGROUPS
> 
> >I realize we had a recently discussed this in passed thread, but I want
> to keep this alive as we need to make this decision very soon.  Plus, I
> want to have as much community involvement/input on this choice as
> possible.
> >
> >Regards,
> > ________________________________
> >|                                |
> >| Scott T Weaver                 |
> >| <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>            |
> >| Apache Jetspeed Portal Project |
> >| Apache Pluto Portlet Container |
> >|________________________________|
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to