Mailing-List: contact geronimo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 10:49:10 -0500
Subject: Re: JNDI Impl
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v552)
From: Dain Sundstrom <dain@coredevelopers.net>
To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: 
 <73C10A8E30ECD311ADAA00508B6693F008B7DBC9@cfukexch04.ws.london.cantor.com>
Message-Id: <D9D10DA5-C9B7-11D7-A062-000393DB559A@coredevelopers.net>

I totally agree.  Services like persistence and remoting should be 
reused as munch as possible throughout the system.  JNDI could be 
broken down as follows:

Remoting <---> JNDI Logic <---> Persistence
                    |
                    +----> JAAS/JACC (authentication/authorization)

JNDI may also want to use a cluster aware cache service.

Since we don't have any of these services, I think we should just focus 
on keeping the code clean and decoupled, with the idea that we will 
plugin other services as they are completed.  Build for today, but 
allow for the changes coming tomorrow.

-dain

On Friday, August 8, 2003, at 07:55 AM, Kington, Max wrote:

> Agreed,
>
> File based JNDI implementations do have their merits, they're really
> useful as a tool in development, and for demonstrating the concept of
> JNDI.  Sun ONE's Message Queue comes with a filecontext JNDI store
> for just this reason.
>
> There's no reason why a JNDI implementation couldn't take a similar
> approach to the pluggable persistance/storage as the CMP engine. So
> that your underlying store can be what you like. What would be really
> nice is if it used the same persistance interfaces as a potential
> CMP engine.  So that the intended stores can be pluggable.  I could
> therefore amke my object stores repository be as clever or stupid
> as It would make writing a clusterable JNDI store easier IMHO.
>
> Max
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henri Yandell [mailto:bayard@generationjava.com]
> Sent: 08 August 2003 13:35
> To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org; Richard@Monson-Haefel.com
> Subject: Re: JNDI Impl
>
>
>
> +1. Over time I would expect the maintenance/bug conversation to move 
> to
> Commons.
>
> My particular jndi-impl is a bit of a joke in that it's a client-side 
> only
> implementation that uses .properties/.xml as a store underneath it. 
> But I
> wrote it because of how I felt a JNDI server should work in a container
> [and be usable without even a JNDI server running].
>
> Pushing Commons Lang out is my primary aim atm, but I'll grabb the jndi
> code to a laptop and take it camping with me this weekend.
>
> Hen
>
> On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, Richard Monson-Haefel wrote:
>
>> I think its proper to discuss it on this list under some specific 
>> thread
> so that
>> everyone can contribute, discuss, etc.
>>
>> "Kington, Max" wrote:
>>
>>> Richard,
>>>
>>> Where would this live and would you take the discussion of it's
> development
>>> elswhere? That's not a request, that's a question, I've got some 
>>> points
>>> regarding this pivitol point of J2EE infrastructure with regards to
>>> security.
>>>
>>> I just wouldn't want to miss the discussion,
>>>
>>> Max
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Richard Monson-Haefel [mailto:Richard@Monson-Haefel.com]
>>> Sent: 08 August 2003 11:21
>>> To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: JNDI Impl
>>>
>>> The JNDI implementation I wrote for OpenEJB was really simple. It 
>>> used a
>>> binary tree to locate sub contexts and cached lookups for speed. It
> wasn't a
>>> full fledged JNDI implementation in that you could not dynamically 
>>> bind
> or
>>> unbind objects. The JNDI Environment Naming Context is supposed to be
>>> immutable after server start up. That's why its possible to create a
> very
>>> lightweight implementation that is easy to maintain and very fast.
>>>
>>> If you created a stand alone JNDI ENC it wouldn't be very useful 
>>> outside
> of
>>> the J2EE context.  It may be better in the long run to have a 
>>> complete
> JNDI
>>> implementation which is based on something in the commons. For the 
>>> short
>>> term, however, we can use something more akin to what I created for
> OpenEJB
>>> -- its doesn't take long to create and is flexible enough to play 
>>> nice
> with
>>> other systems.
>>>
>>> James Strachan wrote:
>>>
>>>> Just a thought - Richard do you think the JNDI is gonna need much
> hooks
>>>> to Geronimo or will it be just a 100% vanilla JNDI.
>>>>
>>>> Am wondering if (say) Henri moved the JNDI to Jakarta Commons for us
> so
>>>> its easy to reuse (thanks Henri!), we could then add any extra stuff
> we
>>>> need inside Geronimo for now and if it turns out that some reusable
>>>> code can be pushed back into Commons we can do that too.
>>>>
>>>> On Friday, August 8, 2003, at 08:04  am, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Additional:
>>>>>
>>>>> Am also a Commons committer, so can handle things like setting the
>>>>> project
>>>>> up and website etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe the person to speak to about the Tomcat JNDI is Costin
>>>>> Manolache. No idea if he's hooked into the Geronimo feed yet.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hen
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm happy to help with the JNDI if required. Moving Tomcat's JNDI
>>>>>> impl to
>>>>>> Commons has been a 'how the hell do I approach that' task on my
> list
>>>>>> for a
>>>>>> while.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've also got a peculiar JNDI implementation
>>>>>> [http://www.osjava.org/simple-jndi] so might have some odd ideas 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> throw
>>>>>> in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hen
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Richard Monson-Haefel wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I created a JNDI implementation for the Environment Naming 
>>>>>>> Context
> in
>>>>>>> OpenEJB that was simple and fast.  I think David Blevin's may 
>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>> modified it so that it plays nice with servlets in Tomcat or with
>>>>>>> Tomcat's JNDI implementation. At any rate, I would be happy to
>>>>>>> recreate
>>>>>>> a similar implementation for Geronimo.  Should I plan on doing
> this?
>>>>>>> Anyone object?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Richard Monson-Haefel
>>>>>>> Author of J2EE Web Services (Addison-Wesley 2003)
>>>>>>> Author of Enterprise JavaBeans, 3rd Edition  (O'Reilly 2001)
>>>>>>> Co-Author of Java Message Service (O'Reilly 2000)
>>>>>>> http://www.Monson-Haefel.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> James
>>>> -------
>>>> http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
>>>
>>> --
>>> Richard Monson-Haefel
>>> Author of J2EE Web Services (Addison-Wesley 2003)
>>> Author of Enterprise JavaBeans, 3rd Edition  (O'Reilly 2001)
>>> Co-Author of Java Message Service (O'Reilly 2000)
>>> http://www.Monson-Haefel.com
>>
>> --
>> Richard Monson-Haefel
>> Author of J2EE Web Services (Addison-Wesley 2003)
>> Author of Enterprise JavaBeans, 3rd Edition  (O'Reilly 2001)
>> Co-Author of Java Message Service (O'Reilly 2000)
>> http://www.Monson-Haefel.com
>>
>>
>>

/*************************
  * Dain Sundstrom
  * Partner
  * Core Developers Network
  *************************/