felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Felix Meschberger <fmesc...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: HttpService import
Date Fri, 11 Sep 2009 05:58:01 GMT
Hi,

Sten Roger Sandvik schrieb:
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 9:59 PM, Richard S. Hall <heavy@ungoverned.org>wrote:
> 
>> On 9/10/09 15:54, Sten Roger Sandvik wrote:
>>
>>> But it's also possible to have new httpservice under "http" directory
>>> (with
>>> version 2.0.0) and keep the old one for now under "http.jetty" directory.
>>>
>>>
>> Well, we certainly don't have to delete it immediately, but stop developing
>> it. Once we feel confident it is a sound replacement, then we can delete the
>> old one.
>>
>>
> Yes, totally agree :-)

I think so, too.

Regards
Felix

> 
> 
>> -> richard
>>
>>  On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Richard S. Hall<heavy@ungoverned.org
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 9/10/09 15:33, Sten Roger Sandvik wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Richard S. Hall<heavy@ungoverned.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/10/09 15:24, Sten Roger Sandvik wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, that would be the best thing for trunk. So, I propose we
delete
>>>>>>> http.jetty folder and import the new under http folder.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> If it is still using Jetty, then why are we not just keeping the
>>>>>> http.jetty
>>>>>> module?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> The new httpservice implementation has more than one module. It's
>>>>> structured
>>>>> in a way that you can have multiple implementation using the same "core"
>>>>> functionality. Jetty module is only starting the jetty engine and
>>>>> registering a dispatcherservlet to jetty. All code that is handling the
>>>>> startup and property settings is essentialy the same in both old and
>>>>> new,
>>>>> but it differs on the actual "dispatching" of requests.
>>>>>
>>>>> So we can either have a nested module structure like this (what is in
>>>>> the
>>>>> new code):
>>>>>
>>>>> * http
>>>>> * http/api
>>>>> * http/jetty
>>>>> * http/bridge
>>>>> ... etc ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Ok, makes sense. I prefer the nested module structure...
>>>>
>>>> ->  richard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Or a flatten structure like this:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> * http.api
>>>>> * http.jetty
>>>>> * http.bridge
>>>>> ... etc ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Nested module structure is by far the easiest when it comes to compling
>>>>> only
>>>>> the httpservice implementation which now is composted of multiple
>>>>> modules.
>>>>>
>>>>> /srs
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> ->   richard
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Richard S. Hall<heavy@ungoverned.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In that case we can just replace the current impl (keeping
the name),
>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>> call it version 2.0.0, no?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ->    richard
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 9/10/09 15:19, Sten Roger Sandvik wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To be cear: new http.jetty service should be a 100% dropin
>>>>>>>>> replacement
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> the old http.jetty service. I think it's pretty close
right now
>>>>>>>>> since
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> actual implementation of new http.jetty bundle is almost
the same
>>>>>>>>> code
>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>> the old one.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 9:15 PM, Sten Roger Sandvik<srs@x3m.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The current http.jetty implementation is almost identical
to the
>>>>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>>>> http/jetty implementation. So in my opinion it's
not neccesarry to
>>>>>>>>>> keep
>>>>>>>>>> implementing on the old one, unless it's some really
good points in
>>>>>>>>>> doing
>>>>>>>>>> so. So the folder could then be http (just use another
version than
>>>>>>>>>> http.jetty).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Sten Roger
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Felix Meschberger<
>>>>>>>>>> fmeschbe@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The IP Clearance vote period will soon end and
we will be able to
>>>>>>>>>>> import
>>>>>>>>>>> the HttpService contribution by Sten Roger Sandvik
[1].
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the current folders in the Felix trunk,
I consider
>>>>>>>>>>> importing
>>>>>>>>>>> the modules into a httpservice folder (we already
have a
>>>>>>>>>>> http.jetty
>>>>>>>>>>> project, which is the Jetty Embedding HttpService
implementation).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> WDYT ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>> Felix
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-1456
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
> 

Mime
View raw message