incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Strachan <>
Subject Re: [geronimo] Core Service Framework (Was: RE: Names & Projects)
Date Wed, 06 Aug 2003 16:47:58 GMT
Maybe a quicker answer to this thread is -  the core Geronimo container 
is an EJB / MDB container which supports pluggable services via JMX. 
Thats quite different to the scope of Avalon.

(Can you tell I've given up caffeine recently - my brains still a bit 
fuzzy today :)

On Wednesday, August 6, 2003, at 05:39  pm, James Strachan wrote:

> On Wednesday, August 6, 2003, at 05:18  pm, J Aaron Farr wrote:
>> Quoting James Strachan <>:
>>> On Wednesday, August 6, 2003, at 04:34  pm, J Aaron Farr wrote:
>>>> Quoting James Strachan <>:
>>>>> To be certified Geronimo needs to fully support JMX. So the current
>>>>> plan is to follow the Tomcat 5 & JBoss ideas to use MBeans to
>>> register
>>>>> & wire the services together. Whatever component model or libraries
>>> a
>>>>> particular service wishes to use is up to it I suppose, it 
>>>>> shouldn't
>>>>> really affect the core container.
>>>> So geronimo will be built on top of Tomcat 5?
>>> Not quite - it'll use JMX & JNDI to bind services into the core
>>> container (J2EE certified remember). Tomcat 4/5 will be one of those
>>> services that plugs into Geronimo along with things like Jetty, 
>>> tyrex,
>>> openjms etc.
>> so the core container will be code developed from scratch within 
>> geronimo?  or
>> will it just an mbean server from mx4j?
> The core container has already been developed - we should be able to 
> put it somewhere (CVS / web) soon I hope. Then hopefully things will 
> be a bit more clear.
> A J2EE container is a little different from an Avalon container. 
> Avalon is a generic service/component framework. The core Geronimo 
> container is an optimised J2EE container developed from a great deal 
> of experience and use of JBoss, OpenEJB & mx4j.  Its particularly 
> geared towards EJB & MDBs.
> Its not unlike saying, why have 2 web application frameworks (ducks 
> the usual JSP v Velocity v JSF v Tapestry kinds of debates). Whilst in 
> the same general ballpark they have quite different motivations & use 
> cases which leads to different code bases if you want to do them well. 
> Like most things the devils in the details. However once the codes put 
> somewhere (soon I hope) you'll be able to take a look and judge for 
> yourself.
> Note like I said, there's no reason why you couldn't deploy an Avalon 
> container inside Geronimo. So maybe a better way to look at this is 
> you could embed Avalon into Geronimo if you wish - but for the 
> foreseeable future the core container in Geronimo won't be based on 
> Avalon itself.
> Remember most of the work is in the services that drop into Geronimo - 
> so if you're trying to spread the Avalon word - I'd focus on that if I 
> were you.
>> Not to rant too much on the subject, but Avalon's containers (ie- 
>> Phoenix,
>> Merlin and Fortress) are designed to do just this.  JMX support 
>> exists and
>> there's been some work done on proper JNDI support.  You can already 
>> run Tomcat,
>> Jetty, OpenJMS and a host of other services within Avalon as it 
>> stands now.
> I'm aware of that. Like I said - the devils in the details.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message