jackrabbit-oak-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Dürig (JIRA) <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (OAK-17) Modularisation and configuration concept
Date Mon, 07 May 2012 10:15:48 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-17?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13269488#comment-13269488

Michael Dürig commented on OAK-17:

An excerpt from the discussion at [1]. See also OAK-87.

{noformat}Instead of saying that we support "OSGi" and "non-OSGi" deployments, I'd like 
to set the baseline to "plain Java". It should be possible to construct any Oak
configuration with nothing but normal constructors, setters and (where needed) 
simple lifecycle methods like init()/close(). No interpretation of XML files or
evencustom "configuration URLs" should be needed for such a setup.

As long as that's possible, it'll be easy to support any kinds of more advanced
deployment and configuration mechanisms, be they OSGi or not. 

[1] http://markmail.org/message/2n4bbbehwl66m5b7
> Modularisation and configuration concept
> ----------------------------------------
>                 Key: OAK-17
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-17
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: core, jcr
>            Reporter: Michael Dürig
> We need to come up with a concept for modularisation and configuration. There is some
initial discussion on the list [1]. While we need to make sure that we are interoperable with
OSGi, I don't think we should use OSGi itself for the lower granular pieces. That is, for
certain subsystems of oak-jcr or oak-core for example. Still we need a way for handling dependencies
between and configuration of implementation classes. In the case of oak-jcr there is the GlobalContext
class. This is basically poor man's dependency injection and I'd like to get rid of it as
soon as we have a better solution. What I'd like to have on that level is compile time dependency
injection such that we get loose coupling between implementation classes but don't get the
additional complexity from run time dependency injection (aka OSGi).
> [1] http://markmail.org/thread/hpssa4r6brlt5cwa

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


View raw message