portals-jetspeed-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sami Leino" <sami.le...@netorek.fi>
Subject [JETSPEED 2] Service framework progress
Date Sun, 15 Feb 2004 19:03:27 GMT
I was finally able to catch up with the developer list postings sent after
Nov 2003. I'm propably late with this, since the most active discussion
has already passed by. If I'm late, just discard the message and don't
bother answering.

Here are the questions I would like to ask:

1) I got the impression that you have decided to use PicoContainer as the
underlying service framework, possibly using a common services layer
and/or Jetspeed-Cornerstone to hide it's presence. Am I correct?

2) You seem to have arranged an IRC session on Feb 10 about the service
framework issues. Is there a log available anywhere on the net?

3) Did anyone construct a full comparison chart at any phase listing the
pros and cons of alternative frameworks?

4) Have you been able to set up a component acquire/release policy
already? Of course it's not an issue at all if you will only provide
singletons, but it's a major issue if your framework delivers pooled
instances as well. Have you found any frameworks containing some kind of
support for automatic releasing?

5) What kind of scheduling support there will be?

About comparing frameworks: I found this comparison about Spring and
PicoContainer on the net. I presume you all have read this before, but
here it is anyway:

  http://www.springframework.org/docs/lightweight_container.html

The chapter 6 compares Spring and PicoContainer. I presume you are aware
of PicoContainer's characteristics already, and you won't see the listed
issues as major drawbacks, like I do. But, I think one can live with them
- they just make your life a bit harder.

Spring, on the otherhand, seems to include many things that aren't needed
by most of us. I'm not sure if there is a proper separation between the
core microkernel and other features (like support for AOP, MVC,
transactions and so on) - there certainly should be. Otherwise, the
framework won't be widely adopted.

Again, I apologize for being this late.

Sami

-- 

Sami Leino
Software Developer
Netorek Oy

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