On 7/31/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Please see my comments inline.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "ant elder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 3:29 AM
> Subject: Re: Support for SCA Java package imports/exports, was: svn
> commit:
> r559257
>
>
> > On 7/30/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> [snip]
> >> Luciano Resende wrote:
> >> >    - Another issue I noticed is regarding resolving classReferences.
> >> > Because loading a given class would never fails (no class loader
> >> > isolation) there is never going to be delegation to the proper
> >> > modelResolver from a contribution that is exporting the package. Any
> >> > ideas here ? Or should we revisit this when we enhance classLoader
> >> > support?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> Right, SCA Java imports will only be effective in environments using a
> >> different classloader per SCA contribution, which we have not
> >> encountered yet. I'd suggest to revisit this when we encounter such an
> >> environment. For now adding support for Java import/export only helps
> >> validate the import/export extensibility mechanism.
> >
> >
> > How about we create such an environment? We seemed to be getting lots of
> > new
> > function added these days - for things like starting and stopping,
> > incremental updates, this import/export stuff, etc - but nothing that
> > actually properly uses the function, and then issues like the above
> > mentioned class loader problem meaning its actually not at all easy to
> use
> > the function when you do try to. I don't think thats so good for the
> > project
> > as it makes it hard to understand why things a getting so complicated,
> so
> > wouldn't it be better to have something 'real' that exercises that code?
> > How
> > about we create an environment that properly demonstrates using multiple
> > contributions and all the code and function we're adding around that?
> >
>
> I think we need to have a good balance here. Writing a new Tuscany server
> is
> exciting. For those who already run their applications on existing host
> environment such as Tomcat and Geronimo, maybe it's more desirable to have
> Tuscany to be well integrated/embedded. I agree with you that we need to
> have something real that exercises the new features. IMHO,
> Tuscany/Geronimo
> integration will be a good testbed.


I don't know details of whats happening in Geronimo, is it getting support
for all the things like incremental updates, isolated class loaders,
import/export etc, and if so could more of that work happen here in Tuscany
so it can be shared by other things like Tomcat integration / webapps /
what-ever-else that comes along? I think its important to have this here in
Tuscany so will try to continue working on things like the webapp
distribution, seems a shame to be duplicating work thats going on elsewhere.

   ...ant

Reply via email to