On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 July 2008 23:27, Richard Wallace wrote: > > > It's a bit different than the way the servlet and filter loading works > > in the petstore and chronos apps. Instead of having the JettyService go > > out and look for instances of those services I renamed it to > > JettyServletContainer and had it extend an a ServletContainer interface > > with methods to add servlets and filters. I did this mostly in > > anticipation of being able to move to an OSGi container at some time in > the > > (hopefully not too distant) future since this meshes more naturally with > > the way you would do it in that environment and will make it almost > > trivially easy to implement an OSGiServletContainer or somesuch. > > Well, I disagree. OSGi is nowadays advocating the Whiteboard pattern and > Extender pattern, both having the central service looking for providers. > The > argument is the service tracking required is reduced, and the "many" are > easier to write than the "few". > In fact, we borrow that idea over here. Hmm that's interesting. Admittedly I haven't done much with OSGi yet. From what I do know about it, I think that probably makes sense in most cases. But in this scenario we'd still have the OSGiServletContainer that would handle the complexity of tracking the availability of the HttpService and manages registering and reregeristing the servlets when it comes available. >From further reading, the worst case scenario in the OSGiServletContainer would be the whiteboard. Probably more likely is that it would rely on something else (like the Pax Web Extender) handling the whiteboarding and just registering the servlet as a service. OTOH, I can see the point that avoiding the difficulties that have been discovered in not treating it as a whiteboard in early days of OSGi are probably a good thing. > > > > Just let me spend a bit of time extracting it out of my code base (should > > be almost as simple as renaming the package since I've tried to keep > things > > as loosely coupled as possible) and add in some comments and do other > bits > > of cleanup and I can either attach it to a message to the list or create > an > > issue in JIRA and attach it to that. Which do you prefer? > > We prefer "svn commit" ;-) > Everything except Core is open for anyone to commit. Commit rights are > granted > after registering on JIRA. > So, if I wanted to add stuff to the libraries I could. Cool. I'll clean stuff up and get it in there so you guys can take a look. > > > Cheers > -- > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer > > I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er > I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc > I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug > > _______________________________________________ > qi4j-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev >
_______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
