directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Zoerner <ste...@labeo.de>
Subject Re: Why I think Spring + xbean is wrong ...
Date Thu, 06 Mar 2008 17:04:48 GMT
Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> ... 
> 
> I do think that we went far too far.
> 
> wdyt ?

Let me first say that I really liked the idea of making configuration of 
ApacheDS simpler form a user (e.g. administrator) perspective. The xbean 
approach did a good job here, the files are shorter and more expressive. 
Unfortunately, some ports of the configuration are comparable 
complicated to the 1.0 pure Spring world (or even more complex).

For instance:
...
     <!-- The desired quality-of-protection, used by DIGEST-MD5 and 
GSSAPI.  -->
     <saslQop>
       <value 
xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans">auth</value>
       <value 
xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans">auth-int</value>
       <value 
xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans">auth-conf</value>
     </saslQop>
...

Although it is probably easy to complete the xbean configuration and 
reduce such parts. This should happen at least, because we easily loose 
the simplification we achieved.

The question I asked myself when xbean was introduced: Isn't it possible 
  to use our own namespace and use pure Spring 2.0 functionality for 
that to make configuration easier? This has been done with transactions, 
AOP etc. in Spring itself.

Perhaps we can obtain a comparable result with native Spring features, 
and avoid the dependency to xbean.

http://static.springframework.org/spring/docs/2.0.x/reference/extensible-xml.html

Whether this will conflict with Emmanuel's requirement to make 
configuration easier to parse/edit with Studio -- I have not thought 
about that yet.

Greetings from Hamburg,
     Stefan




Mime
View raw message