river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dennis Reedy <dennis.re...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Need for jsk-dl.jar
Date Tue, 04 Jan 2011 12:31:27 GMT

On Jan 4, 2011, at 358AM, Dan Creswell wrote:

> I don't know about forgotten but as far as I recall the separation isn't
> entirely about supplying what is needed by clients or services. Looking at
> the release notes below I can see a couple of critical things:
> 
> (1) The reference in respect of assuming these classes will always be
> present.
> (2) The statement about what is bundled - definition of "the platform".
> (3) The statement that any other classes present are to be considered "an
> implementation detail".
> 
> The notes also cover jsk-lib.jar of course and discuss the fact that these
> are the common utility classes that services or clients may want to make use
> of. Should a service make use of these utility classes for it's own
> server-side implementation only it would include jsk-lib.jar on classpath
> but I doubt it would expose jsk-dl.jar to clients. If of course, it wants to
> make use of the utility classes in its proxy implementation, jsk-dl.jar
> would appear as codebase.
> 
> In essence, although we see general usage of jsk-lib.jar, it's not part of
> the platform or expected to always be present on classpaths.

This is true. But in practice, in the usage of Jini over the past few years, has that expectation
proven accurate? 

For my modularization to proceed, it is easy for me to create a module that contains the jsk-dl.jar
contents, and have a jsk-lib module depend on the jsk-dl module. This is no problem. 

I am using Maven for modularization experiment. It looks okay so far, seems to fit well into
the project (with a couple of classes being forced to reside in the platform due to dependencies.
 The modularization separates the project in modules that each produce an artifact in the
River distro. So river-platform module produces river-plaform.jar (was jsk-platform.jar),
and (now) river-dl will produce river-dl.jar and river-lib produce river-lib.jar. The river-lib
module will depend on river-dl, so when river-lib is resolved it naturuall will have river-dl.jar
and river-platform.jar as part of it's classpath.

I am doing it this way because I really want to move away from classdepandjar. Although classdepandjar
has been a standard bearer in the Jini service construction realm for years, I think it has
been one of the major confusion points for developers.

Regards

Dennis
Mime
View raw message