> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Moran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2003 1:24 PM
> To: Slide Users Mailing List
> Subject: RE: First Cut of a Revised Slide Architecture 
> 
> 
> James,
>     Thank you for the clarification.  That does in
> fact help.  While I think more about what you wrote,
> I'd like to ask a couple of other questions:
> 
> 1) To what extent would the changes you're proposing
> affect the current APIs?  

My guess is that an API change may be required, mostly due to the
transport agnostic case. I would harbor a guess that the current API
assumes a lot about the kernel being inside the same VM. So, that would
lead to the next question: what the API would look like.. Not sure yet
on that one. I'd like something that of course would offer serializable
beans and look simliar to other Java APIs such that the learning curve
is minimized. That would include the adoption of patterns for the lookup
of the service using either a protocol convention (http, jmx, etc),
separation of the API from the transport service providers, etc. If one
of the 2 JSRs on CMS make sense, great! But, I haven't dug into them
enough to know yet.. 

WRT JSR 147, here is the info I've obtained so far:

<emails>

Email #1:

Hi James,
 
We only made a couple of changes from the Community Review (a missing
property name, and an additional "retryCount" parameter for the
authentication routine), so the current WVCM interface is likely to be
the final interface, unless problems show up during implementations.  So
the most helpful thing you can do at this point is forge full speed
ahead with your implementation, and let us know if you encounter any
problems!  Also, if you can accumulate any test routines that you could
contribute to the TCK, that would be very helpful as well.
 
Cheers,
Geoff

Email #2:

http://www.webdav.org/deltav/wvcm
 
The JCP gives me very limited control over the visibility of information
at the JCP site, so I currently am keeping a copy of everything at the
webdav site.
 
Cheers,
Geoff

Email #3:

Currently, we have at least one group interested in doing a
WebDAV/DeltaV-based implementation of WVCM, and I've told them we'd love
to have that as part of the reference implementation, but we don't yet
have a commitment from them for that yet.
 
Cheers,
Geoff

</emails>

Feel free to jump into the API more on this one and maybe even JSR 170.
I'd love to get a task kicked off and complete soon as to what the API
around the kernel should look like. As for the course grained API, that
will probably just be a wrapper API that does more discrete units of
work on behalf of the client to keep the CMS state WebDAV-compatible. My
guess is that if we craft a small doc using the existing DocBook XML
format (I'm assuming its docbook) from the current Slide build, we could
produce some docs and offer then up for comment from the public by
posting to JavaLobby, TheServerSide, Java Channel, et. al. 

> 
> 2) Would any of the changes you're proposing improve
> the code with respect to caching?  

I haven't considered that to this point, but my first thought is to get
it working, then optimize with caches. If the current caching mechanism
is sound and would transfer to the new API smoothly, then maybe we just
expose a configuration setting in the domain.xml to turn it on or off?!
I hadn't noticed the problem since I plan on using a web interface for
my current project and webdav clients only for things I don't offer via
the web interface during the early interations. 

James

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

Reply via email to