That is my point. It's disabled, but present.
Install MH 1.4 (from trunk) and notice that "demo_capture_agent" entry is still 
there, even w/o "matterhorn-capture-impl.jar".


To sum up my point, there are following design problems:

1. 
demo capture agent already become a part of server, and it everywhere. in the 
server's code and server's configuration. Skipping -Pcapture does not solves 
this problem.

2. 
newcomers looking at Matterhorn try to change server's configuration trying to 
make it work with their capture agent, or trying to figure out what 
"demo_capture_agent" is. 

3.
Sometimes people are forced to use demo capture agent.
Using one that is actually part of a server is  badger-legged solution.



Solutions 1:
Fixing current solution, by splitting configuration into server and demo 
capture agent's & separating the code. + explaining how to install server only 
& how to install demo capture agent only.


CONS:
-developers will soon again mix capture agent and server code (unwittingly).

-developers will introduce changes to server and reference capture agent at the 
same time (common part of code) -  and alter the protocol for communication 
between the server and actual capture agents.




Solution 2:
removing demo capture agent's code

CONS:
-no comfortable, easy in use & install reference capture agent.


Solution 3:
moving demo capture agent's code into separate repository.


PROS:
1. nobody will confuse demo capture agent (part of the server), with the server.

2. developers will have a reference demo capture agent (nothing but java 
needed).

3. there will be an option to find problems like - not updating Capture Agent's 
URL properly or easily test capture on multiple agents.

4. there will be an option to differentiate reference capture agents (different 
capabilities) for testing and test server with multiple capture agents even 
working with one PC.

5. Capture Agent Developers will have a place to start.

6. Server developers may be told to test their code with previous version of 
reference Capture Agent.
 

CONS:
1. third repository project (next to server, actual capture solution).


===============
OK, fixing what we have right now is also a solution (the first mentioned), but 
I think not the best.


-Pawel


--- On Tue, 4/17/12, Tobias Wunden <[email protected]> wrote:

> From: Tobias Wunden <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Opencast Matterhorn] Separate Capture Agent & Matterhorn Server
> To: "Opencast Matterhorn" <[email protected]>
> Date: Tuesday, April 17, 2012, 12:21 PM
> Rüdiger,
> 
> > I would be a +1 for removing the demo capture agent. I
> thought it would not be part of the default 1.3 install
> anymore?
> 
> the demo capture agent is only built if you include
> -Pcapture in the commandline.
> 
> > It would be a good idea too to separate the CA release
> cycle from the core release cycles. It would probably help
> to get the APIs more stable. And the CA has other milestones
> like th release of a new Ubuntu version, that the Core
> system. Unfortunately this would probably mean that we would
> need a release managment for the CA too and we would need a
> QA phase for this. Another pro would be that testing the CA
> and the core can be more focused than, as we don not need to
> evaluate the whole system.
> 
> I agree.
> 
> Tobias
> _______________________________________________
> Matterhorn mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe please email
> [email protected]
> _______________________________________________
> 
_______________________________________________
Matterhorn mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn


To unsubscribe please email
[email protected]
_______________________________________________

Reply via email to