jakarta-taglibs-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mark R. Diggory" <mdigg...@latte.harvard.edu>
Subject Re: Accepting new projects [was: LDAP taglib proposal]
Date Mon, 30 Sep 2002 13:47:53 GMT
Pierre Delisle wrote:

>---
>Call for Action
>
>Here are some things we need to do to help us move forward:
>
>- All: Is this the right direction?
>     
>  We still need to refine the proposal made above, but how
>  does it sound in general? Is that the direction we should take to
>  be more flexible in handling new project submissions?
>  [the main difference with the current rules is that we would not
>   mandate a project to be fully cooked before being accepted;
>   we would simply require it to have clear motivation for its importance, 
>   clear commitment from the submitters, and clear interest from the community).
>
I think the sandbox is important place for projects to start out because 
otherwise they endup like the current JNDI Taglib, stale and without 
developers. I think it should be a requirement that a taglib gets a 
certain following (both in terms of # users and developer support) 
before it can graduate from the sandbox. With this in mind, having a 
number of individuals interested in getting together to work on a 
project in the sandbox should be grounds enough to get a branch started.

But,...

there should be a definite passage through your development process 
before files start showing up. We need to isolate that we all want to 
see the same results from the project. (ie right now some want a LDAP 
library while others want a JNDI library, while similar in architecture, 
they encompass different scopes of application).  Making sure that the 
design fits cleanly at both scopes is important.

>- JNDI/LDAP
>
>  Orhan, Mark, Mike: Would this process work for all of you interested in a newly
>  designed JNDI/LDAP taglib? If yes, then I'd propose that you guys decide among
>  yourself how to get the motivation/comparative analysis documents ready for 
>  consideration by the list.
>

------------------ Orhans response

> Hi Pierre,
> I agree with Glenn in some points. However, your proposal is 
> acceptable for us. Here is my plan;
> - Me, Ayhan Alkan and Murat Go"rgu"ner are going to contribute to 
> JNDI/LDAP taglib design and development. We'll be glad if Mike and 
> Mark join us. This would be our team for the project.
> - We can prepare motivation, comparative analysis and high-level 
> taglib design in 2-3 weeks.
>
> I'm looking for your comments.
> Regards
> Orhan Alkan

I have a couple of questions:

1.) As we all have interest in the design of the library as well as its 
development, shouldn't this process be exposed to the community 
(jakarata-taglib's) as well via jakarta-taglib developers list?

2.) As you've somewhat decided that a broader scope JNDI taglib is 
favored over a narrower scope LDAP taglib, what are we going to gain 
from a comparitive aalysis?

3.) As a JNDI taglib is basically wrapping the behavior of an already 
*well* designed package, shouldn't design of the taglib mirror that 
package? The strategy I had used originally in my project involved 
creating simple wrapper tags that simply called these methods in the 
javax.naming,Context/directory.DirContext stored in a scope of the 
servlet engine.

i.e.

org.apache.jakarta.taglib.naming.ContextTag
org.apache.jakarta.taglib.naming.method.CreateSubContextTag
org.apache.jakarta.taglib.naming.method.DestroySubContextTag
org.apache.jakarta.taglib.naming.method.LookupTag
org.apache.jakarta.taglib.naming.method.BindTag
org.apache.jakarta.taglib.naming.method.UnbindTag
org.apache.jakarta.taglib.naming.method.ListTag
...

org.apache.jakarta.taglib.naming.directory.DirContextTag extends 
org.apache.jakarta.taglib.naming.ContextTag
org.apache.jakarta.taglib.naming.directory.method.GetAttributes
org.apache.jakarta.taglib.naming.directory.method.ModifyAttributes
org.apache.jakarta.taglib.naming.directory.method.Search
...

org.apache.jakarta.taglib.ldap.LdapContextTag extends 
org.apache.jakarta.taglib.naming.directory.DirContextTag
org.apache.jakarta.taglib.ldap.method.ExtendedOperation
org.apache.jakarta.taglib.ldap.method.GetRequestControls
...

I know the details of what will be implemented out of these would need 
to be worked out, but the basic concept is that <jndi:ldap-context> 
would instantiate/use a jndi context. and that the method tags in 
directory and naming could act on that context as well (casted into one 
of its ancestors.).

<!--good jsp page example (calling direcotry/ldap method tags on a 
LdapContext) -->
<jndi:ldap-context ... />

<jndi:lookup..../>

<jndi:modify-attributes.../>

<jndi:extended-operation .../>
....
<!--bad jsp page example (calling direcotry/ldap method tags on a 
Context) -->
<jndi:context ... />

<jndi:modify-attributes.../>

<jndi:extended-operation .../>
....

-My 2 Cents,
Mark



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:taglibs-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:taglibs-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message