geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul McMahan <paulmcma...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Geronimo-Tuscany integration(Sending to both lists)
Date Fri, 29 Jun 2007 14:11:15 GMT
On Jun 29, 2007, at 3:11 AM, Manu George wrote:

>> >
>> > Some of the questions we have are:
>> > 1.  Should we use this plugin approach and host the plugin  
>> separatley
>> > or intergrate Tuscany to be bundled as part of the Geronimo
>> > distribution?
>>
>> The plugin approach looks OK to me, but maybe somebody from the  
>> Geronimo
>> project could give a more educated opinion?
>>
>
> I believe we can start with a plugin approach but if we run into some
> problems with implementation as a plugin then probably we can think of
> full fledged integration.
> Can someone from the Geronimo community with expertise here, please
> give their opinions on this.


Implementing as a plugin should not affect the technical design of  
this component.   I don't know of anything you can do in a component  
integrated into Geronimo at assembly time that you cannot do in a  
plugin integrated after installation.   A plugin is really just a  
component that has been preconfigured for rapid deployment and  
dependency downloading.   It's a packaging decision.

IMO new components created for Geronimo that are not required by the  
JEE specification should be implemented as plugins.  This is a rule  
of thumb, and in some cases there may be justification for an  
exception.  Like for example if we believed that almost every  
Geronimo user will need SOA then we should discuss "full fledged  
integration".  Another type of exception would be if we think that  
the component would provide useful services to Geronimo's native  
components.


Best wishes,
Paul



Mime
View raw message