portals-jetspeed-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Weaver, Scott" <Swea...@rippe.com>
Subject RE: Service and Component Frameworks (why cornerstone is currentl y in J2)
Date Mon, 01 Dec 2003 19:51:16 GMT
Hi Martin,

> 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?

It can indeed stand alone.  It is, Jun correct me if I'm wrong, becoming a development standard
at Cisco.  Personally, I would love to see Cornerstone become a Jakarta project or even a
top level ASF project.  In fact I suggested this in the conference call David and I had with
the Cisco developers.

Cornerstone, "A History":

Cisco donated 100% of the Cornerstone code base in working condition along with a slew of
J1 enhancements, a very kewl gesture on their part.  David (Sean Taylor) and I were given
a great presentation by the Cisco developers, they really had done their due diligence; on
Cornerstone in particular.  As for legal issues, this was taken care of, at Cisco, through
all the correct legal channels as to avoid any IP issues.  

> then why would you want to bury / hide it inside of
> Jetspeed?

We aren't "hiding" Cornerstone from anyone, more like shielding it, at least temporarily,
from the same ungodly bullsh*t that plagued Pluto.  There are certain elements in Jakarta
that see every move by large companies (IBM, Sun, etc.) to donate code/participate in open
source as an attempt to hijack control of open source projects or as a way to get a "free
ride" from other open source developers.  I know this is certainly not the case with Cornerstone
nor was it the case with Pluto.  Jetspeed 2's development was severely stalled by these elements
due to the fact that it is heavily dependent on Pluto. I do not want to see the same thing
happen again if those "certain elements" in Jakarta get their panties in a twist over the
Cornerstone framework.


Regards,
*================================* 
| Scott T Weaver                 |
| <weaver@apache.org>            | 
| Apache Jetspeed Portal Project |
| Apache Pluto Portlet Container |
*================================*

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Cooper [mailto:martinc@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 1:44 PM
> To: jetspeed-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Service and Component Frameworks
> 
> 
> "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

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