portals-jetspeed-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Barnhill William" <barnhill_will...@bah.com>
Subject Re: Service and Component Frameworks
Date Mon, 01 Dec 2003 19:29:35 GMT
There seems to be a great deal of support for using Cornerstone as the 
service framework in Jetspeed, and it does look good, but I do have an 
integration question as food for thought:  Shouldn't all of the ASF 
projects be standardizing on either one service framework, or have an 
abstraction layer for service frameworks similar to what commons.logging 
does for logging frameworks? I'd vote for standardization, otherwise 
we'll get hit with lowest common denominator problems. 

If Cornerstone is as good as everyone says, and it is as stand-alone as 
everyone says, then it shouldn't be a problem for it to become it's own 
ASF project and convince almost all ASF projects to use it as their 
default service framework.  Another option would be to donate 
Cornerstone to Avalon and perhaps have an AvalonNG that incorporates 
Cornerstone for services.   If  ASF projects standardize on one 
framework then service X written for Project X can be re-used by Project 
B, given that project B also uses the services that service X depends on.

So far I've been long on ideas and short on code, but I am going to be 
changing that soon.

Btw, how do I request to be assigned to a bug/enh? Or should I just work 
on it and submit the result to the mailing list?

Bill Barnhill


Martin Cooper wrote:

>"Jun Yang" <junyang@cisco.com> wrote in message
>news:3FC6A088.5090200@cisco.com...
>  
>
>>In the Jetspeed Cornerstone Concepts paper, we have a number of
>>Comparison to Other Work boxes for the purpose of comparing it with
>>other (unamed) frameworks and pointing out the unique features of
>>Cornerstone.  We attempted at a comprehensive comparison with Hivemind,
>>Spring and Pico Container and found it too difficult because it requires
>>much more than superficial knowledge of those frameworks.  It will be a
>>great thing if experts of those frameworks can contribute their views.
>>    
>>
>
>I don't mean to be provocative here, but if Cornerstone is sufficiently
>general to warrant comparison with such frameworks as HiveMind, Spring and
>PicoContainer (which does appear to be the case, from the concepts paper and
>presentation), then why would you want to bury / hide it inside of Jetspeed?
>
>Now that Cornerstone is part of the Jetspeed CVS repo, what is the thinking
>on its development going forward? I'm curious about whether it will be
>integrated into Jetspeed to the point where it would not be useful as a
>standalone component, or if the goal is to keep it (semi-)independent. While
>I understand that mass customisation is clearly a factor in portal-land,
>that's not the only space to which it applies, and I can see a use for such
>a framework in non-portal applications as well.
>
>In general, I guess I'd just like to better understand the relationship
>between Jetspeed and Cornerstone. (I'm not currently a Jetspeed user, but
>lurk on this list because of my interest in Pluto and its relationship with
>Jetspeed 2 - and now, possibly, Cornerstone. ;)
>
>--
>Martin Cooper
>
>
>  
>
>>Thanks!
>>
>>Jun
>>
>>BaTien Duong wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>This is exciting. A technical comparision with other opensource
>>>frameworks such as Hivemind and Pico container by the author(s) of
>>>Jetspeed Cornerstone may be helpfull. Will the author(s) care to give
>>>a subjective rating on the maturity of different frameworks?
>>>
>>>I will find some time to look at the source codes.
>>>
>>>BaTien
>>>DBGROUPS
>>>
>>>Jun Yang wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Here are links to the Cornerstone docs.  Warning: they may not be
>>>>light reading material and nevertheless are food for thought.
>>>>
>>>>Jetspeed Cornerstone Concepts
>>>>http://www.bluesunrise.com/jetspeed-docs/cornerstone-concepts.pdf
>>>>
>>>>Jetspeed Cornerstone Presentation
>>>>http://www.bluesunrise.com/jetspeed-docs/CornerstoneFramework2.pdf
>>>>        
>>>>
>(PDF)
>  
>
>>>>http://www.bluesunrise.com/jetspeed-docs/CornerstoneFramework2.ppt
>>>>(PowerPoint)
>>>>
>>>>Any comments and questions are welcome.  Another document "Jetspeed
>>>>Cornerstone Sample Code" will follow soon with runnable demo package.
>>>>
>>>>Jun
>>>>
>>>>David Sean Taylor wrote:
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Im starting a little informal thread discussing Service and
>>>>>Component Frameworks.
>>>>>
>>>>>Currently we are using Fulcrum in Jetspeed-2.
>>>>>While I do like Fulcrum and it has been very useful for us, there
>>>>>are now more advanced service frameworks available.
>>>>>All services in J2 are implemented as Common Portlet Services. The
>>>>>goal of CPS was to act as a layer so that we could more easily swap
>>>>>out Fulcrum in the future. I think that time has come and we need to
>>>>>start reviewing the other frameworks and make a decision.
>>>>>
>>>>>The frameworks we have considering are:
>>>>>
>>>>>1. Hivemind
>>>>>2. Pico Container
>>>>>3. Jetspeed Cornerstone (not to be confused with Avalon Cornerstone)
>>>>>4. Avalon
>>>>>
>>>>>I really like what I've seen in Hivemind, however the current
>>>>>licensing issues concern me.
>>>>>I also think that Cornerstone, contributed by the Cisco team to
>>>>>Jetspeed, is very powerful.
>>>>>Are there other service frameworks we should be considering?
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>  
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message