On Mar 23, 2007, at 8:52 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Sebastien,
Can you please explain to everyone the purpose of this svn area and
what you are planning to do here?
thanks,
dims
Dims,
In the sandbox, I am trying to demonstrate a modular Tuscany kernel
that can support what I described in this thread:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg15782.html
I'm working on this in sandbox/sebastien/java/sca/modules.
Basically I'm trying to come up with a set of black-box modules,
with minimum SPIs, minimum inter-dependencies, covering the
following aspects:
- modules/assembly - SCA core assembly model
- modules/policy - SCA Policy model
- modules/scdl - SCDL support (reading/writing the model from/to SCDL)
- modules/builder - A prototype of a different API to the assembly
model (showing how the same model can implement multiple interfaces)
- modules/java and java-scdl - SCA Java model and SCDL support for it
- modules/wsdl and wsdl-scdl - SCA WSDL model and SCDL support for it
- modules/crud and crud-scdl - a prototype of a simplistic SCA
component implementation type, to help validate the pluggability
into the model and the SCDL support
- modules/http http-tomcat and http-jetty - embedded Tomcat and
Jetty, I want to experiment with a binding (probably based on HTTP)
and I'm not sure which to pick between Tomcat and Jetty for that so
I pulled these two modules in as well and put in modules/http a
small ServletHost interface that will help integrate them.
I'm also just starting to prototype a variant implementation of the
assembly model, to see how a fairly different model implementation
can be swapped without breaking the other pieces (using the
assembly model API interfaces).
So this first set of modules covers part of the SCA metadata/model
story. Next I'd like to start looking at the execution runtime and
see how the execution part of kernel/core can be split in multiple
modules as well. I'd like to see how the SCA Java component support
can be extracted as a separate module for example.
I also copied to my sandbox a top-down build structure including
end to end samples and integration tests, which I'd like to use to
validate that these ideas and this assembly of modules hold together.
So, as I said in the above thread, I'd like feedback, ideas or help
with this work. People have asked for a more concrete proposal and
more details, the proposal is starting to take shape, and I'm happy
to continue to work on it wherever the community feel it should be
done.
From looking at the above description and the commit history it
seems you have forked the code. For example, the "variant
implementation of the assembly model" has a number of changes that
coupled with what you describe above will basically require a re-
write of kernel. What are the reasons for these changes? Couldn't
trunk be incrementally improved? Are there any plans for merging this
with trunk? Is this a revolution?
Jim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
