directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Vincent Tence <>
Subject Re: Picoification
Date Thu, 04 Dec 2003 08:32:24 GMT

> I like the style I have done as it reduces the jar bloat of a for users 
> of teh frameworks in question.  For example, Pico users would not like 
> to see avalon-framework.jar as a requirement for using directory/ldapd

I realized that yesterday while Picoifying some bits of the AAA
framework the way you suggested. I like it that way, it's cleanly

> So in short, we are more interested in an open config design, rather 
> than the closed Configurable design of Avalon (or similar).  
> WebServerConfig is an interface with getters. There are bean and ctor 
> impls, as well as one that XStream used that is just private member 
> vars.  Additional ones may be PropertiesFileWebServerConfig, 
> XmlFileWebServerConfig, RemoteWebServerConfig etc.

Pico indeed lets you work the way you want, that's what I like the most.

> >2. If we want to do logging in the Pico implementation, we need to provide a
> >Monitor2Logger adapter. 
> >
> Yes.  If you embrace entirely the Monitor design, then yes. However I 
> have coded it only for the Pico concrete impl. The Avalon one still uses 
> the A-F logger natively. As I say I hate logging nowadays :-)
> >So we need a mechanism in the Pico front end to
> >configure the component with the correct adapter. 
> >
> Yes.  In AltRMI (also in incubator), there are many classes ending in 
> Monitor that gove a pluggable choice.

I'll take a look at that.



View raw message