Hi, On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Carsten Ziegeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jukka Zitting (JIRA) wrote: > > Why is the scheduler bundle needed? Can't Sling use Quartz directly? > > > > > The scheduler bundle makes scheduling tasks much simpler than directly > using Quartz; it uses Quartz underneath but provides a simpler api and more > important uses the whiteboard-pattern to schedule tasks. This allows you to > write background components that have no dependency to Quartz and only an > indirect dependency to the scheduler bundle.
ACK, thanks. > It always makes sense to abstract things like the uses scheduling library; > this allows to change the implementation without breaking contracts. Or YAGNI, and adding the abstraction just introduces extra complexity and potential bugs. Are there potential cases where Quartz wouldn't be appropriate for a Sling deployment? I'm just looking at the scheduler code and all I'm seeing is wrapping around Quartz. If the purpose is to provide a nicer API for applications, shouldn't we be contributing that as an improvement to Quartz? This is just a generic observation, no need to change things that already work. BR, Jukka Zitting
