On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 8:18 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto: >> >> On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 11:16 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto: >>>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 9:11 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<snip> >>>>> 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). >> >> so AIUI the packages would contain only container binding code. >> deployment would depend on both packages and understand how to build >> both types of container. sounds good. >> >> which module would contain the avalon specific bindings? > > In the above tree all of the code is in the sar-deployment. > phoenix-package simply takes the sar and prepare packages adding the > phoenix-bin content. > spring-avalon-package would add spring and the avalon-spring-bridge-library. > > Once all of our components will be free from avalon then we will be able to > introduce a spring-deployment (or spring-package) with no dependencies on > avalon-spring-bridge-library and sar-deployment. sounds like a plan :-) > In my opinion we could even decide that spring-avalon-package will be our > only new distribution and stop working on phoenix. i keep thinking back to conversations about james i've had at various apachecons. i think that the james mail application needs to focus much more on a single basic default configuration which can be integration tested. if there is no need to support experimental and extension features in phoenix then i think it can be easily maintained. but i think it makes sense to emphasize the spring deployment for developers and extenders. >To mantain 2 deployments without having tests is an effort. integration tests are something that can be address and needs to be. the framework used in IMAP can - with a little work - be apply to integration testing the james application. a set of basic test scripts for each supported protocol can be created and used to test each. for more advanced features and configuration we don't support out-of-the-box for phoenix. > I use phoenix and its ability to run > multiple sars in the same contaier with isolated classloaders but I bet I'm > an isolated case and most james users simply start phoenix with our bundled > james.sar and nothing else. phoenix has proved very stable in production use but slows development of advanced features. with a little investment up front, the maintainence of a core featureset on pheonix shouldn't be such a major task. - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
