Return-Path: 
 <avalon-dev-return-6493-qmlist-jakarta-archive-avalon-dev=jakarta.apache.org@jakarta.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-avalon-dev-archive@apache.org
Received: (qmail 61541 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2002 10:06:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131)
  by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Jan 2002 10:06:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 14063 invoked by uid 97); 7 Jan 2002 10:06:00 -0000
Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Received: (qmail 14036 invoked by uid 97); 7 Jan 2002 10:05:58 -0000
Mailing-List: contact avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:avalon-dev-subscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
List-Help: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
List-Id: "Avalon Developers List" <avalon-dev.jakarta.apache.org>
Reply-To: "Avalon Developers List" <avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Received: (qmail 14023 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2002 10:05:58 -0000
Message-Id: <200201071005.g07A5u215020@mail008.syd.optusnet.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
From: Peter Donald <peter@apache.org>
To: "Avalon Developers List" <avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Armi - Alternate to RMI (Commons-scratchpad)
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 19:07:38 +1100
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2]
References: <3C2D9EE4.20007@yahoo.com> <3C2DAC9F.5080508@yahoo.com>
 <3C38D5E2.2060801@yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <3C38D5E2.2060801@yahoo.com>
X-Wisdom-Cookie: .
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

On Mon, 7 Jan 2002 09:55, Paul Hammant wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I've been working quite a bit in the Commons project on the ARMI tool.
>  First off, it has to be renamed - ARMI is used by an academic group as
> "Asynchonous RMI".  Secondly I'm not getting huge approval (in one case
> outright hostility)

im not surprised ;)

> there - I do not know if there will be a consensus
> of +1s by committers when it comes to move ARMI from 'sandbox' to 'main'.

one of the joys of commons. People who don't work on the code get voting 
rights. Fun - aint it?

> What we don't know at this stage (making the massive assumption that
> Peter, Berin et al are as keen as I am) is how much we use ARMI.  We
> could easily create a Cornerstone block that is geared towards the two
> remote publications impls (sockets and RMI).  We could also, as outlined
> above, allow Phoenix to directly (under configuration) use ARMI to allow
> one block to <depend> on a service of others irrespective of the
> location of that service.  It could nearly seamlessly mesh into the
> current org.apache.avalon.framework.component.ComponentManager API.

I don't think it is time to put it inside the Phoenix "kernel" just yet and 
have not yet reached a stable point in ClassLoader etc arrangement. If you 
want to have an exporter Block then great ;) It would also be possible to add 
a BlockListener that automagiocally published different Blocks into the ARMI 
exporter.

I don't have time to play atm but it sounds neat.
-- 
Cheers,

Pete

-----------------------------------------------------------
    If your life passes before your eyes when you die, 
 does that include the part where your life passes before 
                        your eyes?
-----------------------------------------------------------


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>