below.
Simon
Thanks,
Raymond
--
From: "Mike Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 2:08 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Tracking Tuscany extensions, was: Distribution zips and
what they contain, was: SCA runtimes
Simon Nash
Thanks Mike for putting things in perspective. It always helps to think of
these topics in terms of problem that we are trying to solve and who the
audience is before we get into the details of how to solve it. Your idea of
creating wiki pages for each of these topics will help clarify things
furth
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Mike Edwards <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
b) A variety of functional components, that represent sets of coherent
> functions.
>
> Each consists of a series of the basic modules, aggregated together.
> Their function in life is to assist developers of applicat
"Mike Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 2:08 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Tracking Tuscany extensions, was: Distribution zips and what
they contain, was: SCA runtimes
Simon Nash wrote:
Actually this isn't quite what I was saying. (Sorry that I wasn't
clear.
Simon Nash wrote:
Actually this isn't quite what I was saying. (Sorry that I wasn't clear.)
I'm talking about the lowest level components that we distribute as
binaries, not about larger groupings that are created from these components
to provide convenient aggregations of functionality. These
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 3:50 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ant elder wrote:
>
>>
>> So just to be clear on what is being suggested this would be like the
>> launcher we used to have back in M2 days right?
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>>
> No, the M2 launcher mixed too many differen
ant elder wrote:
So just to be clear on what is being suggested this would be like the
launcher we used to have back in M2 days right?
...ant
No, the M2 launcher mixed too many different aspects:
a) load the Tuscany JARs
b) download then from the network as necessary
b) launch your applic
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ant elder wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
>>>
>>> Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
>
> There are a few patterns we use to det
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I wonder if some of this debate is due to us not all talking about they same
thing so maybe it would help to go back to this proposal:
Here's what I'd like to see as a user:
- a short list of A
ant elder wrote:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
There are a few patterns we use to determine if a maven module is
required. Let's take the contribution stuff as an example.
1) contribution conta
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
>
>> Raymond Feng wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> There are a few patterns we use to determine if a maven module is
>>> required. Let's take the contribution stuff as an example.
>>>
>>> 1) contributi
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I wonder if some of this debate is due to us not all talking about they same
thing so maybe it would help to go back to this proposal:
Here's what I'd like to see as a user:
>
> - a short list of API JARs that I c
Graham Charters wrote:
+1 from me also. We shouldn't confuse modularity purely with
versioning or whether something can be used on its own. It's also
about being able to make different combinations of modules to fit
different deployment profiles.
I agree with that, and this should be consider
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
There are a few patterns we use to determine if a maven module is
required. Let's take the contribution stuff as an example.
1) contribution contains the interfaces for the contribution model and
default implementation classes, SPIs and
+1 from me also. We shouldn't confuse modularity purely with
versioning or whether something can be used on its own. It's also
about being able to make different combinations of modules to fit
different deployment profiles.
I think it was Ant who first brought up the distinction between what
mak
Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
There are a few patterns we use to determine if a maven module is
required. Let's take the contribution stuff as an example.
1) contribution contains the interfaces for the contribution model and
default implementation classes, SPIs and extension points
2) contributio
Thanks,
Raymond
--
From: "Simon Nash" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 12:33 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Tracking Tuscany extensions, was: Distribution zips and what
they contain, was: SCA runtimes
Comments inline.
Simon
Rajini S
Comments inline.
Simon
Rajini Sivaram wrote:
On 6/10/08, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebast
Hi Rajini, couple of comments below
2008/6/11 Rajini Sivaram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 6/11/08, Graham Charters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> If we assume one bundle per Tuscany module for developers, perhaps
>> there's a need for a separate concept that provides a simplified view
>> for users?
2008/6/11 ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Rajini Sivaram <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ,snip>
>
>
>>
>> You have probably read this already, but others may find Neil Bartlett's
>> discussion useful:
>> http://www.eclipsezone.com/articles/extensions-vs-services/
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Rajini Sivaram <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
,snip>
>
> You have probably read this already, but others may find Neil Bartlett's
> discussion useful:
> http://www.eclipsezone.com/articles/extensions-vs-services/
>
Great article, thanks for the link. Thats over a y
On 6/11/08, Graham Charters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If we assume one bundle per Tuscany module for developers, perhaps
> there's a need for a separate concept that provides a simplified view
> for users? The SpringSource Application Platform has the concept of a
> library, which has caused
If we assume one bundle per Tuscany module for developers, perhaps
there's a need for a separate concept that provides a simplified view
for users? The SpringSource Application Platform has the concept of a
library, which has caused much debate in the OSGi world (it has its
own manifest header).
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Rajini Sivaram <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If we are anyway going to require a "launcher" of some form,
> wouldn't it be just as easy to maintain one-bundle-per-module?
>
I agree, if we go back to requiring a launcher that changes a lot how we'd
could put this t
On 6/10/08, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ant elder wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Simon Nash wrote:
>>>
>>> ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
> [
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 10:59 PM, Mike Edwards <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Good debate here, but let's be clear about the big picture before the
> details swamp the debate.
>
Big +1 to that, i really hope we can some consensus on what the
distributions and runtimes should look like before we
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 7:03 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ant elder wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Simon Nash wrote:
>>>
>>> ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Seb
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 6:52 PM, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please see my comments inline.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
> [snip]
>
>> Good requirement, but I don't think that the current manifest +
>> tuscany-all JAR solution is a good one (for example it mixes APIs and
>> intern
Mike Edwards wrote:
...
Are people interested in exploring these ideas?
Jean-Sebastien,
I'll start with the last question first: YES.
But I'd next like to step back from what I can see is developing into a
somewhat "active" debate (to use a neutral euphemism)
:)
and investigate
the big pi
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I'd like to discuss the following: "What distro Zips are we building
and what do they contain?"
I think we could improve our distro scheme to provide:
- smaller packages
- easier for people to find what they need
I was thinking abo
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I'd like to discuss the following: "W
Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
Please see my comments inline.
Thanks,
Raymond
[snip]
Good requirement, but I don't think that the current manifest +
tuscany-all JAR solution is a good one (for example it mixes APIs and
internals in the same JAR, doesn't work well with IDEs, works only for
one big
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I'd like to discuss the following: "W
Hi,
Please see my comments inline.
Thanks,
Raymond
[snip]
Good requirement, but I don't think that the current manifest +
tuscany-all JAR solution is a good one (for example it mixes APIs and
internals in the same JAR, doesn't work well with IDEs, works only for one
big distro, requires diff
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Simon Nash wrote:
>
>> ant elder wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> I'd like to discuss the fol
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Simon Nash wrote:
>
>> ant elder wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> I'd like to discuss the fol
Simon Nash wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I'd like to discuss the following: "What distro Zips are we building
and
what do they contain?"
I think we could improve our distro scheme to p
ant elder wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I'd like to discuss the following: "What distro Zips are we building and
what do they contain?"
I think we could improve our distro scheme to provide:
- smaller pa
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
>>
>> I'd like to discuss the following: "What distro Zips are we building and
>> what do they contain?"
>>
>> I think we could improve our distro scheme to provide:
>> - smaller pack
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I'd like to discuss the following: "What distro Zips are we building and
what do they contain?"
I think we could improve our distro scheme to provide:
- smaller packages
- easier for people to find what they need
I was thinking about the following binary distro
Sorry for the delay in responding. I have been out sick for a few
days and I am just getting back to my Tuscany mail. Comments inline.
Simon
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Comments inline.
Simon Nash wrote:
Well, I think the smart installer approach will be a nightmare. We
had a similar ap
Comments inline.
Simon Nash wrote:
Well, I think the smart installer approach will be a nightmare. We had
a similar approach in M2 and people didn't like it.
The M2 approach was very different from what I was proposing. M2
downloaded everything on demand at runtime. A smart installer would
ant elder wrote:
On Feb 10, 2008 10:06 PM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But that's OK, if people don't like that split I can also live with a
single big runtime distro.
Over time, we will add more and more optional features and this will
become more and more of a problem. IMO, it
On Feb 10, 2008 10:06 PM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But that's OK, if people don't like that split I can also live with a
> > single big runtime distro.
> >
> Over time, we will add more and more optional features and this will
> become more and more of a problem. IMO, it's bad en
Comments inline.
Simon
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Mike Edwards wrote:
Jean-Sebastien,
Let's chat some more about objectives, to see why we're seeming to
look at this differently:
[snip]
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I was thinking about the following binary distro zips:
- tuscany-
On Feb 3, 2008 7:49 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One thing looking at those Spring downloads is that i think they're more
> > comaprable to out SCA, SDO, and DAS downloads.
>
> I don't understand why you're saying that. I was following a scheme
> similar to Spring in m
Mike Edwards wrote:
Jean-Sebastien,
Let's chat some more about objectives, to see why we're seeming to look
at this differently:
[snip]
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I was thinking about the following binary distro zips:
- tuscany-core.zip - The base that everybody needs.
core assembly
Jean-Sebastien,
Let's chat some more about objectives, to see why we're seeming to look
at this differently:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Mike Edwards wrote:
[snip]
>> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I think we could improve our distro scheme to provide:
- smaller packages
- easier for peopl
ant elder wrote:
[snip]
I'm leaning more towards what Mike is suggesting.
OK it doesn't look like we're reaching a consensus as at least two
people don't seem to like the scheme I proposed.
I take it back then, forget about my proposal, but I still think that a
single download containing al
On Feb 2, 2008 3:23 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike Edwards wrote:
> [snip]
> >> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> >> I think we could improve our distro scheme to provide:
> >> - smaller packages
> >> - easier for people to find what they need
> >>
> >
> > I agree with
On 02/02/2008, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike Edwards wrote:
> [snip]
> >> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> >> I think we could improve our distro scheme to provide:
> >> - smaller packages
> >> - easier for people to find what they need
> >>
> >
> > I agree with the objec
Mike Edwards wrote:
[snip]
>> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I think we could improve our distro scheme to provide:
- smaller packages
- easier for people to find what they need
I agree with the objectives. The second of the two is more important
from my perspective.
I was thinking about t
On 31/01/2008, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Comments inline.
>
>Simon
>
> Mike Edwards wrote:
>
> > Folks,
> >
> > As with Simon Nash - sorry for my slow reply but the SCA spec work has
> > been a hard master over the past 2 weeks ;-)
> >
> > Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> >
> >> S
Comments inline.
Simon
Mike Edwards wrote:
Folks,
As with Simon Nash - sorry for my slow reply but the SCA spec work has
been a hard master over the past 2 weeks ;-)
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
>> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
- What distro Zips are we building a
Folks,
As with Simon Nash - sorry for my slow reply but the SCA spec work has
been a hard master over the past 2 weeks ;-)
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
>> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
- What distro Zips are we building and what do they contain? just the
runtime? samples
On Jan 29, 2008 3:09 PM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry for the late response. I have been travelling and in OASIS
> meetings, and I'm just catching up with the ML now.
>
> See comments inline.
>
> Simon
>
> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
>
> > Simon Nash wrote:
> > >> Jean-Sebas
Sorry for the late response. I have been travelling and in OASIS
meetings, and I'm just catching up with the ML now.
See comments inline.
Simon
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
>> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
- What distro Zips are we building and what do they contain? ju
Thank you, Sebastien. Graham or I will provide the changes once the new
distribution poms are ready.
Thank you...
Regards,
Rajini
On 1/24/08, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Rajini Sivaram wrote:
> > Would it be possible to add an OSGi manifest header into these zip files
>
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:46 AM
> Subject: Re: Distribution zips and what they contain, was: SCA runtimes
>
>
> > Rajini Sivaram wrote:
> >> Would it be possible to add an OSGi manifest header into these zip files
> >> so
> >> that the
it to automate the generating OSGi manifests as part of the
maven build.
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message -
From: "Jean-Sebastien Delfino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: Distribution zips and what they contain, w
On Jan 24, 2008 5:36 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> ant elder wrote:
> > On Jan 23, 2008 5:53 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> If this is mainly about reducing the size of the download
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> No
> >
> >
> > I'm puzz
Rajini Sivaram wrote:
Would it be possible to add an OSGi manifest header into these zip files so
that the zips can be directly installed into an OSGi runtime? The entries
will not have any impact when used without OSGi.
+1
The only issue would be the
creation of these entries. We have two op
ant elder wrote:
On Jan 23, 2008 5:53 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
If this is mainly about reducing the size of the download
[snip]
No
I'm puzzled by this. One of the two goals at the start of this thread was
"smaller packages".
I'm puzzled that you find that p
On Jan 23, 2008 5:53 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> If this is mainly about reducing the size of the download
> [snip]
>
> No
I'm puzzled by this. One of the two goals at the start of this thread was
"smaller packages". If size really isn't an issue then whats the pro
Would it be possible to add an OSGi manifest header into these zip files so
that the zips can be directly installed into an OSGi runtime? The entries
will not have any impact when used without OSGi. The only issue would be the
creation of these entries. We have two options - 1)generate them
automat
ant elder wrote:
[snip]
Would each distro include everthing it needs or is tuscany-core.zip a
prereq?
tuscany-core is a prereq. That's what I meant with "tuscany-core - The
base that everybody needs."
Where do all the different data bindings go?
Some in tuscany-core, some in tuscany-web,
Raymond Feng wrote:
[snip]
- tuscany-jee.zip - For JEE app integration
EJB, RMI and JMS bindings, Spring components
I think we should have WS binding in tuscany-jee.zip as WS is part of
JEE. (Maybe -jee should be a superset of -web).
JEE like other platforms supports Web Services but I
On Jan 22, 2008 5:36 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Simon Nash wrote:
> >> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> >> - What distro Zips are we building and what do they contain? just the
> >> runtime? samples or not? dependencies or not? are we building
> >> specialized distros
Please see my comments inline.
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message -
From: "Jean-Sebastien Delfino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 9:36 AM
Subject: Distribution zips and what they contain, was: SCA runtimes
Simon Nash wrote:
>> Jean-S
Simon Nash wrote:
>> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
- What distro Zips are we building and what do they contain? just the
runtime? samples or not? dependencies or not? are we building
specialized distros for different use cases?
[snip]
With a big topic like this, dividing it into separate threa
70 matches
Mail list logo