cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <stef...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Migrating to Avalon. Thoughts?
Date Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:14:13 GMT

On 12 Nov 2003, at 15:31, Stephen McConnell wrote:

>
>
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
>>
>> On 12 Nov 2003, at 12:50, Stephen McConnell wrote:
>>
>>> Just a note to let you know that there are a number of
>>> threads currently running over on the dev@avalon.apache.org
>>> concerning the establishment of a component repository
>>> project.  After reading your email I think that many of the
>>> subjects you have addressed below are relevant to the things
>>> the Avalon crew are currently debating.
>>
>>
>> a content repository is a place where you store semi-structured data, 
>> you version it, you add metadata and you query it... it has to scale 
>> O(1) with the number of nodes (not even o(n), that's too much) and 
>> allow the smallest granularity possible (potentially, down to the 
>> very DOM node). Plusses are: granular ACL, node linking, 
>> transactionality, obvservability.
>>
>> a component repository is a library of java components, a sort of 
>> CPAN/PEAR/apt-get for java.
>>
>> Can you do a component repository with a content repository? yes, of 
>> course.
>>
>> Can you do a content repository with a component repository? no and 
>> would even be silly to try to do so.
>
>
> Just one more variation to complete the picture - a service directory.

Oh god. [sound of stefano banging his head on the table]

> A content repository can be viewed as a service.

Stephen, everything can be viewed as a service. Escalating abstractions 
will not make it any easier for me to have the features I need, rather 
the opposite.

> A directory can be used to discover a service provision solution 
> (using for example a repository of component descriptions).  Component 
> descriptions can reference artifacts in an content repository.  A 
> component implementation can also use a content repository as part of 
> its implementation. Etc., etc.  In this respect - the ideas of a 
> content repository and component repository are synergistic.

As I said, a component repository can be built with a content 
repository. The opposite is simply not true.

My point is: there is no need for slide to look at what avalon is 
doing. The opposite might be true, but I think that using a content 
repository for a component repository is simply overkill. A nice and 
simple web server and a few servlets for lookup/discovery would do the 
job just fine.

--
Stefano.


Mime
View raw message