avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen McConnell <mcconn...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Embedding and standardizing kernel parameter handling and discovery
Date Mon, 27 Oct 2003 17:32:22 GMT


aok123@bellsouth.net wrote:

>Hello,
>
>Ok I'm back - excuse the delayed response.
>
>KernelConfig is good for me if it's good for you guys.
>  
>

Works for me.

>
>  
>
>>>>>1. I think KernelParameters should go into a seperate package that
>>>>>other packages (such as kernel) depend on. This will make it easier
>>>>>when creating the bootstrap process.
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>
>Just to clarify I don't think you Leo disagreed with the package that the config class
was placed into right?  I thought you were just pointing out a preference for a KernelConfig
object rather than the use of a general Map.
>  
>

I think we agree - but I also think we are looking at the question from 
two perspectives.  There are some issues that arrise with respect to 
packages shared across classloaders that can be avioded by seperation 
packages relative to classloader stages.  This is main thing I'm 
focussing on at the moment.  At a system level this basically comes 
together along the lines that Leo is talking about but at a functional 
level there is a desirable seperation related to the bootstrap sequence.

>
>  
>
>>>disagree! Recognize the tight coupling between config and component 
>>>and reflect it :D
>>>      
>>>
>
>Ok I'm going to now look through leo's email regarding the use of xml instead of properties
files.  I like this as well but what do you think about it Steve?
>  
>

XML doing primary bootstrap - NO.
XML during seconday bootstrap - YES.

>Should I just use both an xml configuration and a properties file representing xml path
expressions in dot notation for the names of properties like so:
>
><foo>
>  <bar>abc123</bar>
></foo>
>
>foo.bar=abc123
>
><hit the breaks/>
>
>Now keep in mind having to have an XML parser makes the size of the jar huge and we want
to minimize the footprint.  Also the repo is not operational yet so we can't snarf it down.
 I like the idea of XML but I'm afraid we have as situation where we are feature poor while
bootstraping the repo and should stick to the use of properties files while handling (a).
>

Primary bootstrap should be property driven - i.e. use stuff in the 
JDK.  This lets us establish the repository after which we can load in 
content based on a jdk version.  That content could include XML parsers 
etc. (if required).

Cheers, Steve.

>
>  
>
>>(a) establish parameters for repository bootstrap
>>(b) build repository classloader
>>(c) boostrap repository
>>(d) load and bootstrap the kernel loader
>>    
>>
>
>Perhaps when a modern JDK with an XML parser is the de facto standard then we can go there
but for now unfortunately we might have to go with property files.  Thoughts?
>
>Cheers,
>Alex
>
>P.S. Just thinking out loud here.
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
>
>
>  
>

-- 

Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org




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


Mime
View raw message