avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <pe...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Component Metadata and Metainfo model
Date Fri, 05 Jul 2002 12:17:48 GMT
At 10:27 AM 7/5/2002 +0200, you wrote:
>On Fri, 2002-07-05 at 09:29, Peter Donald wrote:
> > At 09:17 AM 7/5/2002 +0200, you wrote:
> > > > Never going to use an interface again for this. If you remember 
> back about
> > > > 1 1/2 years ago we separated out interface and implementations for the
> > > meta
> > > > classes. It sucked hugely.
> > >
> > >Can't say that I do...could you provide a keyword or archive link?
> >
> > Nope. Have a look through phoenixs CVS history it should be there.
> > Previously I tried to write a generic container infrastructure but failed
> > miserably due to overspecification of everything. The results of this are
> > scattered through history of jakarta-avalon and
> > jakarta-avalon-excalibur/all CVSes under the "container" package.
>rings a bell. What was it again, camelot 'n friends?

camelot and atlantis were later evolutions of it.

>At that point, I think we removed it because the only 'real' container
>we had was phoenix (ECM wasn't really viewed as such) so it made no
>sense to separate any of it out.

I removed it because it sucked ;) It was too over specified and required 
too much architectural investment to be useful outside of a very small 
range of situations.

>Now, we have quite a few containers (and everyone now has an idea of
>what it is and does) and some more experience. I'd say the situation
>thus has improved to a point where more people get what we're doing, and
>on the other hand we're off worse because there is no portability.
>Hence trying once again, no?

Well I only started containerkit so I can share stuff between Cocoon and 
myrmidon. Interoperability between those two (and Phoenix if possible) is 
still main objective for me.

> > Your definitions differ from mine then. Metainfo is meta information about
> > type. (MOF Level 0 MetaData). It has 0 information about profile prototype
> > or anything similar.

Meta-Object framework maybe ?? One of OMGs numerous specifications.

> > MetaData is the component profile.
> >
> > Entry is the runtime information about component. ie Actual Logger,
> > Context, instance (or pool), dependency instance references etc.
> >
> > My model does not say anything about component profile prototype. I was 
> not
> > going to address it as I wanted to see the outcome of work that Peter is
> > doing on phoenix and Stephen is doing on Merlin.
> >
> > The model also does not offer a COnfiguration or Parameters Schema yet
> > (again I am waiting to see experimentation on Phoenix).
>ah. These definitions aren't very clear from looking at the current
>containerkit :/
>I take it I should look at kernel.ComponentEntry....that's pretty devoid
>of any explanation or contract atm...I take it the idea is to expand on
>it once we know a bit more?

No - it will be deleted once the rest of containerkit is validated. I am 
just using it as testing framework to see what works and what doesn't. It 
may grow into something else but not its main objective.


Peter Donald
"Faced with the choice between changing one's mind,
and proving that there is no need to do so - almost
everyone gets busy on the proof."
              - John Kenneth Galbraith

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

View raw message