[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-2335?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17140583#comment-17140583
 ] 

Matthieu Baechler commented on JAMES-2335:
------------------------------------------

Partial response:

> I do see it as a way to dynamically load / unload extensions like mailets and 
> change the processing pipeline at runtime.

We don't need OSGi to load/unload things at runtime. It's not hard to load 
things into a sub-classloader.

> OSGi really makes dependency management so much easier and is enforced by the 
> classloader (which does not make available any "private" packages).

Do you mean Java modules are not providing that? I'm very curious, I thought it 
does.

> Email is well-known. It seems to me that we ought to be able to provide good 
> Java APIs with interchangeable implementations.

Yet there's no good implementation out there. The idea that email is a "done" 
topic is completely wrong: just search an IMAP client library and you'll see 
what I mean. Mime handling is not really better. I would not be writing email 
code if it already existed.

> Using Declarative Services seems to me to be a lot cleaner than Guice.

There's overlap in features but they don't solve the same problem.

> It has a really advanced build system (BND) that works awesome with Gradle. 
> Resolving dependencies and packaging up distributions is really clean and 
> easy.

Sounds so cool. But you have to write code now or it doesn't exist, right?

> Modernize James configuration
> -----------------------------
>
>                 Key: JAMES-2335
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-2335
>             Project: James Server
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: configuration
>            Reporter: Benoit Tellier
>            Priority: Major
>              Labels: feature, refactoring
>
> Apache James currently relies on commons-configuration, and thus on XML 
> configuration files.
> As such the configuration process has several problems:
>  - Working with XML is boiler plate
>  - Working with file leads to a real lack of flexibility.
>       - For instance, in a cluster environment, we would like all the James 
> server to share the same configurations.
>       - Also, in tests, we need to test the different configuration values. 
> We can not do this without overwriting files, which is dangerous, and 
> boilerplate.
> What we need is:
>  - To represent all possible configuration via java objects.
>  - Configuration providers should be able to convert the configuration stored 
> into the java configuration object.
>  - We should be able to inject different configuration providers from 
> guice/spring.
> It would allow to specify alternative configuration backends (different 
> formats, different storage techniques) and allow direct injection (for tests 
> for instance).
> Here would be the steps for this work:
>  - Add a *Initializable* class in *lifecycle-api*. This should be called by 
> Guice and Sprint at initialization
>  - *configure* in Configurable will save a Java object (parse the 
> HierachicalConfiguration into a java object representing it's content). 
> Initialization will then be done by *Initializable*.
>  - Then we can move away, object by object, from the *Configurable* 
> interface: We need to move the configuration parsing in a separated class 
> (behind an interface). We can register *ConfigurationProviders*, with an 
> XML/commons-configuration  default implementation.
>  - Deprecate *Configurable*.
>  - Provide alternative configuration providers, for example, a Cassandra 
> stored configuration provider



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscr...@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-h...@james.apache.org

Reply via email to