geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [vote] XBean donation
Date Sun, 29 Jan 2006 22:07:25 GMT
I appreciate the explanation.

+1 to xbean as a subproject now and working to figure out how to  
integrate it.

thanks
david jencks

On Jan 29, 2006, at 10:50 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:

> On Jan 27, 2006, at 1:11 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> I assume this will just be a regular subproject at present.  If  
>> one of
>> the XBean folks could talk a little about how XBean could ultimately
>> be adopted by Geronimo (the app server), that would be great.  I  
>> think
>> we talked about ways that Geronimo and XBean could move to close the
>> gap and thus eventually make it possible to for Geronimo to adopt
>> XBean without it being such a massive change, but I'm a little fuzzy
>> on the details.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>     Aaron
>
> You're a bit fuzzy on the detail because every is a bit fuzzy. I  
> have a few idea about how to integrate the code, but we're not  
> going to know exactly how the integration will work or if we want  
> to do it at all until we try.  Just wanted to drop a warning before  
> jumping into my ideas.
>
> XBean has several modules most of which are designed for direct  
> XBean users like Service-Mix, ActiveMQ and XFire, so I'm going to  
> only address the kernel and server module.
>
> The kernel in XBean has a very light weight kernel compared to the  
> Geronimo kernel.  For example, the Geronimo kernel directly  
> supports object name queries, and in XBean name querying is an  
> optional service.  The other big difference is the code is just  
> easier to follow :)  *If* we decide to switch to the XBean kernel,  
> we can easily create an implementation of the current Geronimo  
> kernel interface that simply calls through to the XBean kernel.  I  
> had this working with the XBean 1.0 kernel, but haven't written a  
> bridge for the 2.0 kernel yet.
>
> The server module is more tricky.  The server module contains  
> simplified start up code, support for spring based configurations  
> and some experimental class loaders.  All of these will take work  
> to determine if they are beneficial to Geronimo and if so, how to  
> integrate them with out breaking current users.  I think that more  
> importantly than integrating the code is integrating the ideas in  
> the server module.  For example, the startup code in XBean would  
> allow us to eliminate the serialized object graph in the our  
> startup jars, which contain important attributes that we can't edit.
>
> -dain


Mime
View raw message