ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <>
Subject Re: Virtual FileSystem Layer
Date Sat, 22 Dec 2001 01:31:36 GMT
On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 11:43, Magesh Umasankar wrote:
> I have been spending some time now on the VFS
> layer...  Nothing major to report yet, but I just wanted
> to sound off so that if I am going down the wrong
> route, I correct it right away.

kool. I wouldn't mind seeing it checked into CVS just so we can browse your 
progress aswell ;)

> 3.  JNDI, by far, beats the above to, in my
> evaluation.  It is generic enough.  We don't have
> any licensing issues.  It has also become part of
> the core JRE (1.4 onwards).  Technically, it fits to a T
> what we are looking for - virtual file system that
> provides search controls, access attributes,
> url mounting, etc.  Furthermore, there's been
> some ground work already done for us at Jakarta/Apache
> (Catalina).  I have written a SPI for a FTPFileSystem
> - though it is in a real crude stage right now.  I believe
> this is the way to go because Ant's code would be
> operating at the (Dir)Context level and we can keep
> adding SPIs as we need them.  Furthermore,
> JNDI has been stable for quite sometime now and
> we can depend on a widely used API.

JNDI is nice. It will be slower - a lot slower - and a bit more memory hungry 
... whether this is an issue or not is another thing altogether.

You may want to check out org.apache.avalon.excalibur.naming in the 
jakarta-avalon-excalibur CVS. It is a framework for writing JNDI providers. 
In actually used it to provide a File based Context a while back.

> Let me know if my approach, so far, to go the JNDI
> route seems reasonable.

hard to say at this stage. Just keep experimenting and checking stuff into 
CVS and we can see where it goes.



| The best defense against logic is ignorance. |

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message