Hi, comments inside again ;)
2010/6/11 Ian Boston <[email protected]>: > Hi Norman, > Inline > > On 11 Jun 2010, at 14:12, Norman Maurer wrote: > >> Hi Ian, >> >> comments inside.. >> >> 2010/6/11 Ian Boston <[email protected]>: >>> >>> On 11 Jun 2010, at 09:26, Norman Maurer wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> before we release M1 of james-server I would like to rework the maven2 >>>> structure of james server . I think we should move some packages >>>> around to be able to better support OSGI in the future. I think many >>>> of the modules are just a left over from the time back when we used >>>> ant. For example the core-library and core-function module. I think >>>> this should get merged. Then we have the different implementations of >>>> many services. Most times we have a db and fs implementation. I think >>>> we should seperate them too. So we could create "cleaner" osgi bundles >>>> later. >>>> >>>> Thoughts ? >>> >>> >>> Having cleaner modularisation from an OSGi point of view would certainly >>> help those that want to use parts of James inside an OSGi environment, by >>> simply depending on the bundles rather than having to role your own or >>> embed. >> >> Thats true! And one of my goals. In the long term I would like to be >> able to run james in osgi. >> >>> >>> How these are constructed? I don't have enough information or experience >>> with James to know, but I would hope that where are only 4 or 5 bundles max >>> for a configuration of James bundles. >>> >> >> What you mean ? The services are constructed via spring with JSR250 >> for injection. > > Hmm, I wonder if its possible to make native OSGi use JSR250 annotations to > construct components. If I wanted to use some other form of IoC construction > I was expecting to have to create my own, but the jars would at least provide > the package export, even if it didn't register James service implementations. You are the osgi guru ;). If we could use JSR250 with osgi this would even preferable .. > >> >> About 4,5 bundles im not sure.. I think we would at least this >> bundles (I only list bundles which are components: >> >> * smtpserver >> * remotemanager >> * pop3server >> * imapserver >> * dnserver >> * domainlist >> * user >> * virtualusertable >> * management >> * spoolmanager >> >> I hope I not missed something. I'm currently not 100 % sure howto >> handle different service implementations. We have for example often a >> db and one file implementation of the same service. So I guess I would >> need to have a bundle for each right ? > > yes Hmm, I guess this would end up with a lot of small bundles. Not sure if I like the idea of have so many maven modules around.. > > > > > >> >> >>> Ian >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Bye, >>>> Norman >>>> >>>> Ps: I think I will start to work on this at the weekend, we can revert >>>> it later if we think it was a bad idea ... >>>> >> >> Bye, >> Norman >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> Bye, Norman --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
