excalibur-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Siegfried Goeschl <siegfried.goes...@it20one.at>
Subject Re: YAAFI/Fortress
Date Tue, 17 May 2005 08:22:05 GMT
Hi Peter,

my comments are below

Peter Courcoux wrote:

> Siegfried,
>
> I had a quick look at YAAFI and perused the excalibur lists over the 
> weekend.
>
> It looks like Fortress is still being actively developed, is used 
> quite extensively and fits the style of component management required 
> by turbine ( ie not wiring comoponents together but making them 
> available in a similar manner to ECM). 

Same for YAAFI ...

> I also note that Fortress has cyclic dependency checking, the lack of 
> which in ECM, was a worry to me in a recent project where I had a 
> number of junior developers writing and using ECM managed components.

This is a design problem and not a container problem ... :-) .... and 
YAAFI is actually unable to run services with cyclic dependencies.

>
> It doesn't look to me like YAAFI has cyclic dependency checking and I 
> think it might be worth looking at how we could use Fortress and what 
> it would take to convert the fulcrum services to be usable in 
> Fortress. It is more work but I'm thinking that biting the bullet now 
> would have many advantages in the future.

We already took a few bullets - the Turbine services were converted to 
ECM and then to Merlin thereby effectively stalling the Fulcrum project. 
I don't have a problem migrating the existing codebase to use Fortress 
but this involves the following steps

1) changing the access to the Avalon context for all services - not a 
big deal and YAAFI supports setting up the correct Avalon context based 
on the "componentFlavour"
2) writing role configuration files but I found nowhere a spec saying 
how to write such a file for Fortress - and I need to write a parser for it
3) sorting out the dependencies and adding them to Fulcrum/Turbine - 
Fortress requires around 20 JARs whereas YAAFI is happy with just two of 
them.

>
> What do you think?

+) making Fulcrum components compatible to Fortress is a good idea
+) using Fortress as default Avalon container is currently not on my 
list - but again this is my strictly personal opinion.

Cheers,

Siegfried Goeschl

>
> Regards,
>
> Peter
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@excalibur.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@excalibur.apache.org


Mime
View raw message