incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Hammant <P...@ThoughtWorks.net>
Subject Re: [Ftpserver] Comments on the new code
Date Sun, 02 Oct 2005 13:13:12 GMT
>
> IMHO, the basic design and implementation should be XML free and  
> provide a
> straight forward API for assembly, configuration (preferably  
> atomic) and the
> other stuff. Any runtime platform support can be added on top of  
> that. Look
> at Jetty for an example of this approach.
>
> Now, Noel's suggestion for OSGi as the runtime platform is  
> interesting, if for
> no other reason than it allows for hot deploy and reloads. But I  
> think it
> would be possible to provide a BundleActivator and register the  
> service(s)
> even if FtpServer does not require OSGi by definition, if the above  
> approach
> is done well (again Jetty is an example of OSGi bundle on top of  
> its API).

You're assuming that frameworks other that OSGi cannot do hot deploy,  
but yes the general idea is to have something akin to POJOs with no  
extends/implements/throws from any framework and optional enablers to  
other frameworks in separate classes or module etc.

It has to be said though that OSGi is on a different branch of the  
IoC family tree to DI favoring frameworks.

- Paul
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message