directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Phil Steitz <>
Subject Re: Embedding Eve Was: To release or not to release?
Date Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:04:25 GMT
Brett Porter wrote:
>>I want a JNDI server which gets its data from commons-config; and not just 
>>use the JndiConfiguration part of commons-config (which I really need to 
>>learn more about).
> Sorry, I remember you mentioning this in the past. I had it back-to-front.
> So would replacing XmlConfigurator in directory-naming with
> commons-configuration suite your needs?

I think that is a good idea. Having the input format flexibility of 
commons-configuration would be a very good thing for [naming].

  Seems like a good idea to me, as it
> could continue to read the current configuration files as well.
> Or do you want more than an in-memory provider, and need Eve itself to do this?

 From the various recent posts, it seems we have two basic use cases here 
and possibly two solutions for one of them -- maybe not a bad thing, but 
something to think about.

1) Centralized access to configuration information and object references 
for physically distributed systems

2) Bootstrapping and providing local, in-memory access to configuration / 
object references based on information in local flat files.

In Java, we want to use the JNDI client API in both cases. 1) is a classic 
application for Directory Services and certainly part of the motivation 
for Eve.  For 2) either embedded Eve or [naming] will work. I am 
interested in understanding the pros and cons of these two approaches.  We 
may want to merge them in some way (i.e., modify [naming] to just front 
embedded Eve). Does this make sense?

FWIW, I would not want to see Tomcat or Geronimo completely abandon 2) -- 
i.e., become wholly dependent on centralized "administrative 
repositories". There are some practical advantages to having basic 
configuration information available locally.


> - Brett

View raw message