Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 9:11 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
1. spring-deployment is a (cool) spring based avalon container
2. pheonix-deployment is an avalon container
3. both depend on components coupled to intrusive avalon interfaces
4. the intrusive nature of avalon is bad for the code base
this means that it's not going to be possible to factor out non-avalon
components within the current layer structure. either
spring-deployment needs to depend on pheonix-deployment or a new layer
is going to be needed the functions and the avalon-containers.
- robert
This is a perfect summary of my previous concerns :-)
To be more precise spring-deployment is a spring based avalon container
compatible with phoenix configuration (config.xml) and descriptors (xinfo)
so, there is something more than avalon in the coupling.
I guess the ideas was to have spring as an avalon container so we could move
some component out of avalon step by step.
makes sense
ATM I'd probably choose the new layer type (-package).
----
sar-deployment
spring-avalon-package
phoenix-package
is spring deployed through a SAR?
No, but it depends on the content of the sar (including the config.xml,
that currently is duplicated in its own folder).
BTW you are the ant build expert here, so do it as you feel it's better. In
m2 we're using named dependencies so both solutions works the same.
it's not an ant limitation but a self-imposed rule of the layering game
You already told me, I know this. Maybe this is an english vs italian
issue. In italian a "limit" can be self imposed.
I use "ant build" with specific reference to our current build based on
ant. I know ant can do anything that can be done in maven. It is the
same as "you can do in c anything you can do in c++".
IMHO james server is so complex from a coupling perspective that
layering needs to be imposed to give an understandable structure. the
rules of the layering may be expected to evolve with time.
If it was for me we probably wouldn't have this self imposed limit, but
I'm fine with it as long as we don't have to put in hacks to satisfy
self imposed limits.
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
