commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Hammant <>
Subject Re: [Vote] ARMI as Commons package +1
Date Wed, 09 Jan 2002 17:19:04 GMT

>I believe that its possible that not enough of us understand the
>background of the ARMI codebase. 
>There's a lot going on, and it can be helpful to spoonfeed us old,
>feeble, and bandwith-challenged folk =:0)
Primarily it is an alterative to RMI.  It exports* method calls to other 
processes.  It does not need to enforce inheritace of a base interface 
(refer 'Remote') not tack on exceptions to the throws of each method 
exported (refer 'RemoteException').  As such in can export 'normal' 
interfaces.  Even one the original authors throught not remote 
accesible.  Now this is not my invention.  A buddy tells me that .NET 
has a 'hassle free' method exporting feature.  Graham Glass did it first 
with Glue.  Glue is The-Mind-Electric's interface exporter over SOAP. 
 It is truly excellent stuff.  Incidentally Graham is the original 
author of the legendary ObjectSpace Voyager app-server ( if anyone can 
remember back to 96).

* In the PROPOSAL.txt document in CVS, there are fuller details 
especially the multiple transports.  The most useful is barely a 
transport at all - it is a Pipe implementation that is of direct use to 
Avalon (and probably nothing else) as it transport method calls between 
classloader leaves in the same VM.

>Given the other tidbits that have come up in this thread, I would now
>toss my binding 
I understand that the move cannot happen before it's use anywhere. 
 Given that rule (which is fair I guess) I might be inclined to stay 
here. However I suspect I will be voted down at any stage, because 
people just plain do not see the need.  This makes me feel essentially 
unwelcome and that I should just go back to Avalon where I am welcome.

>It's important to understand that the sandbox is open to any Jakarta
>committer, and it's helpful to make an actual proposal, as detailed in
>the Commons charter, so that we know what's what.
>If the component is also going to be useful to the Avalon codebase, then
>I would say it has a high potential of being supported in the longterm,
>and would be a welcome addition.
Thanks for taking time to pen a weighty reply.  I am still unsure 
whether I am wasting my time here... There have been 100 postings on 
politics and 10 on AltRMI (nee ARMI), mostly just me talking to myself 
or defending a position.  This group is way more political than Avalon. 
 Anyway, thanks for the lengthy and concilliatory reply - you're a 
worthy Apache dude. Peace n Love n all that....


- Paul H

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message