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 (nike.apache.org: domain of antoine@gmx.de designates
 213.165.64.22 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4CFCF01B.2090503@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 09:15:55 -0500
From: Antoine Levy-Lambert <antoine@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Apache Directory Developers List <dev@directory.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Adding annotations to Configuration beans
References: <B0933F64-ED02-40B0-9653-4B57F5F79F0B@marcelot.net>
In-Reply-To: <B0933F64-ED02-40B0-9653-4B57F5F79F0B@marcelot.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 12/6/2010 9:02 AM, Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot wrote:
> Hi Dev,
>
> I successfully integrated the newly introduced ApacheDS Configuration Reader (with all configuration beans) in the ApacheDS 2.0 Configuration Editor for Apache Directory Studio.
> The UI is not completely finished yet, but I can already load a configuration from an LDIF file and I have access to the values of each bean. It's working really great...
>
> Now, that the configuration can be read, it also need to be written, and I started working on a Configuration Writer.
>
> In order to achieve this, I'd like to propose the addition of several Annotation elements that would be used in the Configuration Beans to help both the configuration writer and the reader.
> Adding these Annotation elements would help maintaining the reader and writer loosely coupled with the beans and would facilitate additions of new configuration items (like those needed by Antoine, or others from third parties implementations).
>
> There 3 annotations I'd like to introduce:
>
> - @AttributeType( attributeTypeId )
> This annotation is intended to be used on a field of a configuration bean and indicates which attribute type id this field is associated with.
> I think it's a great addition as we're no longer in need to infer the id of the attribute type from the name of the field ( same thing for having to truncate the 'ads-' prefix sometimes).
> It's clear and easy.
> Furthermore, only fields with this annotation should be read and written by the configuration reader/writer (which allows the configuration beans to have extra fields that are not necessarily read or written).
>
> - @RDN
> This annotation is intended to be used on a field of a configuration bean in conjunction with the @AttibuteType annotation and indicates that this particular field is the one (and only for a given configuration bean) to be used in the RDN of the associated entry
>
> - @Container( containerRdn )
> This is intended to be used on a field of a configuration bean and more particularly on a field referring to a composite (List, Set, etc.) bean value. It indicates where the adding bean entries are to be placed (in which container entry) like the 'ou=servers' entry under the defaultDirectoryService entry.
  Once you have @Container annotations, maybe the ads-composite 
attributes can be removed ? I think they only exist as a hint to the 
configuration reader that there are subentries to be read.
> Any thoughts on this?
>
> Thanks,
> Pierre-Arnaud
+1
Antoine