My reasoning for removal from the platform spec or making it optional:
Activation is a Service implementation detail.
If there are no objections, I'd like to move it in the near future.
Regards,
Peter.
Peter Firmstone wrote:
Can we move the Activation Framework to a subproject of Apache River?
So it isn't part of the platform?
The Activation Framework could be optional and include the following:
* Phoenix - Activation Service
* Norm - Lease Service (This doesn't make much sense outside
Activation)
* Activatable Fiddler - Lookup Discovery Service
* Activatable Reggie - Service Registrar
* Activatable Javaspaces - Outrigger FrontEndSpace.
* Mahalo - Transaction Service (We can create a Non-Activatable
implementation for the platform)
* Mecury - Event mailbox (We can create a Non-Activatable
implementation for the platform)
These could be bundled together as an Activation Framework Release
Existing interfaces that are specific to Activation in the net.jini
namespace (exclusive of net.jini.activation) could be depreciated and
copied to another package namespace, giving existing applications time
to transition.
Then the activation framework becomes something that runs on top of
Jini / Apache River, rather than part of it, making Jini / River
conceptually simpler to new application developers.
What are your thoughts?
Regards,
Peter.
