Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of enriquer9@gmail.com designates
 209.85.132.242 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=CNV4ib1ktgQ23D/7KicYRniCM7vqmgKKJYCYk/VClrcp91ptFJCXGAdKJcJ0AOgdkqgxukuQ/5pMSJhEzXpfySdgl39hMVAWf6mwgR6nxL65bXbQPdKL8AEbayY/OYEHS1YLjf5LFXrT3gFr54rJky1efW8fcdCr8Q5s2NFPRnE=
Message-ID: <568753d90704161126v2b6697bcuea568f4c0d60a4d3@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 11:26:53 -0700
From: "Enrique Rodriguez" <enriquer9@gmail.com>
Reply-To: erodriguez@apache.org
To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Is org.apache.directory.server;core.prefs still usefull?
In-Reply-To: <d45b08f00704131203ucf50729nffc0a7483b569e20@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <d45b08f00704131203ucf50729nffc0a7483b569e20@mail.gmail.com>

On 4/13/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
> while working on SyntaxCheckers, I get caught in a nasty problem with the
> classes of this package. The question is : do we need it?
> I see no places in the server where we use or instanciate those classes, so
> a blind guess is that those classes are remaining for historical reasons
> (may be they were used years ago).

We added Prefs support back when it looked like it might become a
useful way to handle config in a JDK-standard way.  The idea of having
system- and user-specific config in a DIT makes a lot of sense and
similar mechanisms exist in Windows and Linux.  To answer your
question, it would be useful if Prefs ever became widely used.

At the same time that Prefs hit the JDK, there was a push to add Prefs
as a standard service to the OSGi Service Platform.  So, we add Prefs
to the core of ApacheDS and there is a Prefs OSGi service in my
sandbox, which pretty much just wraps the ApacheDS core prefs with the
OSGi Prefs API.

I don't think it should be part of the core.  If possible it could be
its own module or even rolled into the OSGi Prefs with ApacheDS as a
pluggable back-end.  But, going back to the fact that Prefs hasn't
taken off, I also wouldn't be opposed to just removing it.

Enrique