Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 47458 invoked from network); 23 May 2005 17:54:12 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 23 May 2005 17:54:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 45484 invoked by uid 500); 23 May 2005 16:02:04 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 45442 invoked by uid 500); 23 May 2005 16:02:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 45419 invoked by uid 99); 23 May 2005 16:02:03 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.4 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,RCVD_BY_IP,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of bruce.snyder@gmail.com designates 64.233.170.197 as permitted sender) Received: from rproxy.gmail.com (HELO rproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.170.197) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Mon, 23 May 2005 09:02:01 -0700 Received: by rproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i8so829165rne for ; Mon, 23 May 2005 09:01:58 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=sW4Tt88qBxnYQa+R9YeqnGAP42vnzb0mkFMUsPSzEnF6OQusZFeDnfboKMW2FepOpEwvxCrlTxC+0mgRkk5YkrI+A7Ka1A3wmkWLeVyfdgQi2/1s4253lhBM/jm24oZSZRkWSJmScBDMDtlSsA1cvR/av3lX+Sgs2FFbxbi38iM= Received: by 10.38.104.24 with SMTP id b24mr3215035rnc; Mon, 23 May 2005 09:01:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.38.89.11 with HTTP; Mon, 23 May 2005 09:01:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <7b3355cb05052309015f83ae97@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 10:01:58 -0600 From: Bruce Snyder Reply-To: Bruce Snyder To: dev@geronimo.apache.org Subject: Re: Serialization Vs. XML In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <5a98a125d5d176bdfed851274f49dd34@yahoo.com> <6fd29a83f256b911702d0bc84f4ac898@gluecode.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On 5/19/05, Aaron Mulder wrote: > On Thu, 19 May 2005, David Jencks wrote: > > > It's possible. However, what about enabling/disabling SSL, AJP, > > > IIOP, and stuff like that? Swapping Tomcat/Jetty? > > > > These involve changing which gbeans are present, not changing gbean > > attribute values. The storage format is irrelevant to this. >=20 > I disagree. With serialization, it's impossible to change withou= t > a tool or something. It's not like you can just "cat" in a block of > serialized data to "config.ser". With XML, you could just add or remove = a > block of data in the (I'm speculating) "config.xml" file, right? (I'm > assuming the configuration information is stored in roughly the same form > as a deployment plan, which is to say, one file per configuration with > chunks defining each active GBean in the configuration.) >=20 > If push comes to shove, I like WebLogic's config.xml, which has > terse configuration for the entire server in a hierarchical XML format > (not like a properties file with a list of ports). If we're going to use > external "local" files, maybe they should look like that. I guess Tomcat > has a similar (if more verbose) configuration strategy for server.xml. > The problem is, any format like that would be super-tied to a J2EE > configuration, so it might be better for a separate project that > distributes a separately-certified J2EE-specific configuration of > Geronimo, and not very appropriate for a generic Geronimo "this server > might be assembled to do anything" build. Oh, dear, I think the > abstraction police are going to come and black out this whole paragraph. > Never mind. :) Actually, Aaron, I think you have a good point. In addtion to what David Blevins said earlier: DB> I kind of think that the way we use xmlbeans is the reason you are stuck maintaining it. I think DB> if we moved the data from xmlbeans or any other marshaller into a simple javabeans object DB> tree, we might get more people working with the deployment code. I think that offering a pluggable configuration interface is the way to go. This would allow us offer one configuration interface that ships with Geronimo (e.g. serialization), but also to start other subprojects offering other configuration strategies (e.g. XML, properties files, Spring configuration, etc.). IMO, an abstraction API will save us from having to make this decision for users, i.e. it will allow us to offer a choice. Bruce=20 --=20 perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=3D6-E+G-N>61E