portals-jetspeed-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Glenn R. Golden" <ggol...@umich.edu>
Subject Re: [J2] Service Framework Proposal
Date Mon, 05 Jan 2004 01:44:43 GMT
David -

Can you elaborate on a few of these areas:

What exactly is JMX and what does supporting it mean for us?

What are self contained / self configurable components?

Thanks.

- Glenn

On Jan 4, 2004, at 9:45 AM, David Le Strat wrote:

> Glenn,
>
> This is the kind of debate we should be having.
> Spring actually falls into the AOP/IoC realm though
> Spring is actually much bigger than that as it
> provides an MVC framework and so on.
>
> If we stick to IoC/AOP, whichever framework is being
> used, I believe that IoC 2 or 3 are the best choices
> as you don't need a ServiceManager or JNDI to fetch
> the dependencies from.
>
> Spring also supports AOP and even has its own AOP
> implementation.
>
> On the drawbacks side, using Spring you have to
> provide quite a bit of component metadata (which I
> don't think is really a big deal, but some people may
> think so) and we would have to implement JMX support.
>
> Another drawback of Spring seems to be the component
> configuration itself.  It does not seem possible to
> allow deploying self contained components / self
> configurable components.  Configuration seems to be
> tight to the web application configuration (through
> the applicationContext.xml).  So you would not be able
> to package your application services independently of
> the application.  Please correct me if I missed
> something here.
>
> I have not implemented a service using Spring per say.
>  If we could work around the configuration issue and
> JMX, Spring could actually be a good fit for Jetspeed.
>  Any comments from others?
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> David.
>
> --- "Glenn R. Golden" <ggolden@umich.edu> wrote:
>> David, and Jetspeed all -
>>
>> Thanks for the proposal.  We are also evaluating
>> component frameworks
>> for our CHEF project, which has been based on
>> Jetspeed 1 and the
>> Jetspeed / Turbine service model, which seems a type
>> 1 IoC like Avalon.
>>
>> I am currently very interested in Spring's component
>> framework, which
>> can handle type 2 or 3 IoC.  You  mention it in your
>> analysis, but did
>> not end up recommending using it.  Any specific
>> comments of the merits
>> or problems of Spring, in general, and for Jetspeed?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> - Glenn
>>
>>
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> jetspeed-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> jetspeed-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
> http://search.yahoo.com/top2003
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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