> Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
> > 1.) What features not yet implemented should go into the Slide 2.0
> release?
> 
> There has been a patch JTA patch proposed by Grant Gongaware some time 
> ago. This made the transaction manager implmentation configurable to use 
> the containers instead of Slides integratied TM. It also included some 
> patches moving certain read actions inside transactions.
> 
> While these patches cetainly are valuable (ah, need to check them and 
> add Grant to the contributors list) the concept of using external TMs is 
> to be discussed. The idea of connectors to plug Slide into J2EE 
> containers come up more than once as well. However, this is a bit tricky 
> as Slide needs a web container (not a full J2EE container) to run in the 
> first place. This would mean you might have two containers running. 
> Isn't that weird?
> 
> This really is a philosophical question, I guess. Is Slide something 
> like a document repository that can be connected to a J2EE container 
> just like an RDBMS? Or is it an integrated part of a J2EE container 
> resp. web container (like Tomcat)?
>

I think attacking the full container integration is too big a task if we want a 
2.0 release early next year.
And in any case a J2EE / Servlet Container is 'well specified'. There is no 
specification, as far as I am aware, for a WEBDAV based J2EE container. It 
sounds neat, but big and complicated. I think staying focused is important if 
we want to make a release...

Richie

> Oliver
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 




---------------------------
This mail sent through the 
ungerground webmail system

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to