geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Shiva Kumar H R" <shiv...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Discuss] Model for deployment plans in GEP - Move from EMF to XMLBeans or JAXB?
Date Wed, 12 Mar 2008 02:53:52 GMT
Ok Thanks :)

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 8:16 AM, Tim McConnell <tim.mcconne@gmail.com>
wrote:

> HI Shiva, just for your information, I have finally deleted the
> V1/V1.0/V10
> features, plugins, and runtime. So if you are keeping track we have now
> eliminated:
>
> -- org.apache.geronimo.v10.feature
> -- org.apache.geronimo.deployment.model
> -- org.apache.geronimo.deployment.model.edit
> -- org.apache.geronimo.runtime.v1
> -- org.apache.geronimo.st.v1.core
> -- org.apache.geronimo.st.v1.ui
>
>
> Shiva Kumar H R wrote:
> > I will be committing Yun Feng's patch today, to kick start GEP
> > refactoring :)
> >
> > This patch adds two new directories under plugins:
> > org.apache.geronimo.deployment.v11.jaxbmodel, and
> > org.apache.geronimo.deployment.v21.jaxbmodel
> > which contain JAXB generated classes for our G plans. The patch has also
> > refactored some part of GEP code to use these JAXB model classes instead
> > of EMF.
> >
> > We need to continue refactoring rest of GEP code and eventually get rid
> > of following EMF modules:
> > org.apache.geronimo.deployment.model
> > org.apache.geronimo.deployment.model.edit
> > org.apache.geronimo.v11.deployment.model
> > org.apache.geronimo.v11.deployment.model.edit
> >
> > And further, once we figure out how to handle multiple schemas, we must
> > be able to merge org.apache.geronimo.deployment.v11.jaxbmodel and
> > org.apache.geronimo.deployment.v21.jaxbmodel into *one*
> >
> > Once we have such single model which can handle multiple schemas, I am
> > hoping that we could merge these as well:
> > org.apache.geronimo.st.ui,
> > org.apache.geronimo.st.v1.ui,
> > org.apache.geronimo.st.v11.ui,
> > org.apache.geronimo.st.v20.ui, and
> > org.apache.geronimo.st.v21.ui
> >
> > Just in case we mess up things ;) we have taken backup of existing GEP
> > trunk under branches/2.1/ . We will be committing all new code under
> trunk.
> >
> > And trunk builds might fail for sometime until this refactoring is
> complete.
> >
> > --
> > Thanks,
> > Shiva
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Shiva Kumar H R <shivahr@gmail.com
> > <mailto:shivahr@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     There have been further discussions on this in IRC and in JIRA. As
> >     recommended in
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-dev/200802.mbox/%3c5da94e5a0802212321m4b282128q89add861e150c64f@mail.gmail.com%3e
> >     I am summarizing those discussions below:
> >     (Tim, DJencks, DBlevins & Yun Feng - Please correct if am wrong)
> >
> >     1) JAXB/XMLBeans/DConfigBeans:
> >     a) On a further discussion about XMLBeans and JAXB, we saw that
> >     writing deployment code might turn out be much easier by using JAXB
> >     rather than XMLBeans.
> >
> >     b) On a discussion about whether GEP should ideally be using JSR-88
> >     DConfigBeans, we wondered if JSR-88 DConfigBeans are a dead idea &
> >     should be left alone, because No One other than Geronimo even thinks
> >     about trying to implement them.
> >
> >     So we concluded that it is worth experimenting with JAXB.
> >
> >     2) Hints from OpenEJB about using JAXB:
> >     a) On a discussion about how OpenEJB uses JAXB, it seems schemas are
> >     compiled only once (instead of compiling during every build as is
> >     currently done both in Geronimo and GEP) and checked in to the
> >     source stream.
> >     I too don't see any point in compiling G schemas during every build
> >     of GEP, and the one time compilation & check in approach of OpenEJB
> >     looks ideal to me for GEP also. This would lead to significant
> >     savings in build time. Please point out if I am missing something.
> >
> >     b) It seems that the real beauty (& ease of use) of JAXB comes from
> >     the ability to customize JAXB generated classes (like (i) adding
> >     interfaces, (ii) removing all their wrappers for simple types like
> >     string, int, boolean etc, (iii) using Maps instead of Lists for auto
> >     indexing things that can be keyed, etc). OpenEJB uses those
> >     customizations. To keep the Customized JAXB classes and Schema in
> >     sync, OpenEJB has unit tests that read in xml documents, write them
> >     out again, then compare the results. A similar approach could be
> >     used in GEP also.
> >
> >     3) Handling multiple schema versions
> >     I guess JAXB could help us better with multiple version of schemas.
> >     (I mean a single set of JAXB classes being able to read/write say
> >     geronimo-web.xml in v1.1, v2.0, v2.0.1 etc). We need to explore this
> >     more.
> >
> >     Tim, Yun Feng and myself are looking at completing this refactoring
> >     at the earliest so that we could then focus on other JIRAs/features
> >     & release GEP 2.1. Yun Feng already has a patch that has ported good
> >     amount of GEP onto JAXB and I am looking at committing it tomorrow.
> >
> >     If you forsee any concerns with the approaches above, kindly reply.
> >
> >     --
> >     Thanks,
> >     Shiva
> >
> >
> >     On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Shiva Kumar H R <shivahr@gmail.com
> >     <mailto:shivahr@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >         Please see 11-Feb IRC chat btw djencks, shivahr & mcconne
> >         http://servlet.uwyn.com/drone/log/bevinbot/geronimo/20080211 for
> >         further discussions on this.
> >
> >         As recommended by DJencks we will experiment using JAXB in GEP
> 2.1.
> >
> >         --
> >         Thanks,
> >         Shiva
> >
> >
> >         On Feb 11, 2008 9:22 PM, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com
> >         <mailto:david_jencks@yahoo.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >             On Feb 11, 2008, at 7:16 AM, Shiva Kumar H R wrote:
> >
> >>             I went through following tutorials of JAXB & XMLBeans:
> >>               a) Java Architecture for XML Binding (JAXB)
> >>
> >>
> http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/WebServices/jaxb/
> >>               b) Tutorial: First Steps with XMLBeans
> >>
> >>
> http://xmlbeans.apache.org/documentation/tutorial_getstarted.html
> >>
> >>             Also searched for comparisons btw them. Latest one I could
> >>             find is the following blog from Jan'2005:
> >>             http://technology.amis.nl/blog/?p=321
> >>
> >>             I am yet to see the value add JAXB brings over XMLBeans.
> >>             Am I missing something?
> >
> >             My $0.02:
> >
> >             xmlbeans is a complete and accurate representation of the
> >             xml infoset.  As a result, you can easily manipulate the
> >             xml, but you get a slightly peculiar java object model that
> >             exactly represents the schema and cannot be modified.
> >
> >             jaxb is focussed on the java pojos and lets you modify the
> >             pojos considerably from the xml while still providing
> >             accurate mapping.  This can be much more convenient for
> >             directly constructing a pojo tree from xml suitable for
> >             configuring server components.  It provides fewer validity
> >             checks than xmlbeans.
> >
> >             Openejb is using jaxb and I think their deployment code is
> >             pretty simple for the complexity they have to deal with.
> >
> >             thanks
> >             david jencks
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>             On Feb 11, 2008 4:44 PM, Shiva Kumar H R
> >>             <shivahr@gmail.com <mailto:shivahr@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>                     Despite my liking for xmlbeans and its unique
> >>                     strengths I think a very strong argument can be
> >>                     made for moving the deployer code to jaxb.
> >>
> >>                 Interesting!! Let me do some quick learning of jaxb
> >>                 and start a separate thread on this.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>                     thanks
> >>                     david jencks
> >>
> >>                     On Feb 8, 2008, at 12:30 AM, Shiva Kumar H R wrote:
> >>
> >>>                     2) Geronimo Eclipse Plug-in (GEP):
> >>>                         a) Model framework for Geronimo deployment
> plans:
> >>>                     Currently it is EMF (Eclipse Modeling Framework).
> >>>                     With every update to Geronimo deployment schema,
> >>>                     it's a major pain to generate new EMF classes. If
> >>>                     however, GEP uses the same model framework as
> >>>                     that of Geronimo server (XMLBeans), then at least
> >>>                     this problem would be solved. IIUC JSR-88
> >>>                     DConfigBeans would be the ideal model framework
> >>>                     for GEP - in that case even if the model
> >>>                     framework of server changes in future, GEP would
> >>>                     be unaffected.
> >>>
> >>>                     --
> >>>                     Thanks,
> >>>                     Shiva
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>                 --
> >>                 Thanks,
> >>                 Shiva
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>             --
> >>             Thanks,
> >>             Shiva
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Tim McConnell
>

Mime
View raw message