Just some food for thought to help protect your software from this
duplication...
If I were to start from scratch (not that I would) I would create an
architecture that uses both in a multi-layered fashion.
On the java client side (e.g. Swing) I would:
- wrap a webdav api (e.g. slide) with the jsr170 api
- this allows the client to access any webdav server
- allows swapping jsr170 implementations
- allows for swapping client-side CM tools that are used locally
and
don't need http. I think this is along the lines of jsr-147.
On the server side I would:
- expose the external facing/remote interface using webdav
- this allows existing clients to access it
- it also allows streaming large files over http which is more
scalable then the non-streaming rmi alternative
- internally I would use the jsr170 api so I don't have to define my own
- the server could also act as a webdav client and use the wrapper
mentioned above
I use this logical architecture as a reference model when I need to
decide what to use where and to help protect/decouple me from those
choices.
- John
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Broberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 7:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Slide Users Mailing List'
Subject: RE: Slide and JSR170
Thanks for the response. I quess my question is, "What is the overall
architecture for CMS as far as Apache goes ?" There seems to be quite a
bit
of duplication, and I am not sure why slide wouldn't use jackrabbit, or
170.
They seem like the logical stack. I agree with your assessment re:
webdav.
It is more global in nature.
Just curious, why do you recommend against using the server Slide API.
Is
it because it is only relevant to slide ? If so, I agree, because it
causes
technology lockin. So, if that is the case, what is the benefit of the
server api at all ?
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Oliver Zeigermann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 6:08 PM
To: Slide Users Mailing List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Slide and JSR170
Slide does not support JRS170. Jackrabbit isn't used either. It's the
other
way round as well, Jackrabbit does not use Slide either.
I guess there are quite a number of parameters included in the decision
which way to go, so I really can not make any recommendation.
Good thing about WebDAV is that there already are a number of
applications
supporting it. Drawback would be that WebDAV by nature is a client/sever
protocol, so you would always have the communication overhead. On the
other
hand while JSR170 covers only certain aspects of a content store, WebDAV
is
pretty much complete. Additionally, programming against JSR170 would
restrict you to Java solutions.
I *personally* would not at all recommend programming against the sever
Slide API...
Oliver
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:52:17 -0500, Jeff Broberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Ok, simple question. Is the Slide API based on JSR170 ? If so, is
> JackRabbit used inside Slide ? We are considering if we should write
> our java clients to use WebDAV client protocols or use the Slide API,
> or if possible the 170 api.
>
> Any guidance would be appreciated.
>
> Jeff
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
