avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen McConnell <mcconn...@apache.org>
Subject Re: DevWAv (was Re: Minimum Set of Tags (Revisited))
Date Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:56:26 GMT

Berin Loritsch wrote:

> Stephen McConnell wrote:
>> Disagree - "Developing with Avalon" describes ECM semantics. ECM 
>> semantic are a superset of Avalon semantics. Avalon semantics are 
>> defined in the Javadoc and the lifecycle specifications.
>> Chers, Steve.
> Disagree all you want--Developing with Avalon was written to document
> AF4.0 contracts.  That was its intent.
> It also happens to document some ECM implementation details.


Really - take another look at the document. 
It a good document - but its an ECM document.

> If you disagree with anything written in there, let's put it out on
> the table as I suggested.  Please use the appropriate thread so that
> the topics can stay on track.

What your asking for is unrealistic.  It's like me taking the position 
that every tutorial and example about Avalon included in the Merlin 
product documentation is definitive Avalon - reality - it isn't.  The 
reason why is that Avalon contracts for containers are insufficiently 
defined.  It not a case of going the "Developing with Avalon" (a,k.a. 
Developing with ECM) - it a case of building a complete and proper 
container/component contract.  We have three variations on this the 
Phoenix/component, the ECM(Fortress)/component and the 
Merlin/component.  Of all of these the Merlin/component model is the 
closest to the Avalon model (yes believe it or not).

Converging these distinct models can be achieved in a step by step 
process.  Resolving Fortress/Merlin differences mainly concern the 
semantics of interpretation on component manager or service manager 
lookups.  In addition there is the general requirement for recognition 
of lifestyle marker interfaces.  With those two things in place we have 
a complete transition scenario for ECM and Fortress component into a 
neutral Avalon container environment.  The focus of Merlin has been to 
provide very good support for the A4 contracts.  That exercise is 
largely complete and the ECM semantics support is now in immediate 
sights.  It's one of the reasons why I'm being so stubborn about the 
point concerning implicit semantics.  If someone declares a ECM 
component using @avalon xxx, and @avalon yyy, - this is only meaningful 
if this can be used in multiple environments.  Clearly, ECM and Fortress 
environments imply more that the Avalon classic spec.  This needs to be 
turned into a declarative statement that I can recognize.

Today - I need to read in such a component and reject it because I know 
that Merlin is not provided the semantics that are assumed.  Tomorrow 
that can change.  But simply getting recognition of assumptions is the 
fundamental framework to getting interoperability and supporting migration.

Cheers, Steve.


Stephen J. McConnell

Sent via James running under Merlin as an NT service.

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

View raw message