portals-jetspeed-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jun Yang <juny...@cisco.com>
Subject Re: [J2] Service Framework Proposal
Date Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:33:56 GMT
We thank David Le Strat for doing a great job on the service framework 
proposal.

Here is what we'd like to suggest to add to the proposal:

1. Cornerstone JMX

picoextras/jmx supports registering pico components as JMX components in 
a special JMX-aware pico container directly with an MBean Server.  
Cornerstone JMX is designed for a different purpose: JMX-enable any 
object with no JMX knowledge.  When a component is configured to be 
JMX-enabled, all its states are managed by a standard JMX adapter (The 
name "adapter" maybe misleading to someone unfamiliar with JMX. It's 
basically a tool that allows you to manage JMX components).  A developer 
doesn't need to know anything about JMX to make his/her components 
manageable by JMX.  We generate MBeans dynamically.

We can make Cornerstone JMX a self-contained package to be used in 
Jetspeed so that all services are JMX-enabled with ease without a 
special pico container.

2. Cornerstone Customization

The forte of the Cornerstone Framework is its ability to support 
customizations in many dimensions (component, relationship, flow and 
preservation over upgrades).  Right now it supports type 2 IoC.  But we 
can change it slightly to support both type 2 and type 3 (same as pico) 
while maintaining the same configuration format.  We can make the 
implementation manager part of Cornerstone a self-contained package as 
an approach to wiring pico components based on configuration to give 
pico components the following capabilities:

- Configuration-based (properties files or database) wiring.
- Finer-grain configuration than that picoextras/script's XML solution 
allows (per component configuration file vs. one file per container), 
which is important in supporting the next 2 points.
- Multiple "planes" of configuration with user defined order of override.
- Preservation of customization over upgrades.

For service orchestration, we are in the process of settling on the 
optimal among several solutions.

Thanks!

Jun and Emad

David Le Strat wrote:

>All,
>
>We had quite a few threads on the service framework
>topic, IRC sessions regarding Cornerstone.  In order
>for J2 to shine, the Jetspeed developers community
>needs to come to a consensus and a decision around a
>service framework for Jetspeed.
>
>I have prepared a document (zip file enclosed) that
>tries to articulate what J2 needs from a service
>framework and proposes a direction.  That should help
>provide a basis for a discussion that hopefully will
>lead to a decision / vote on the best alternative for
>the future of Jetspeed.
>
>Regards,
>
>David Le Strat.
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message