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: [Discuss] Please have a look at the River Container
Date Wed, 19 Feb 2014 22:24:16 GMT

On Feb 19, 2014, at 450PM, Greg Trasuk <trasukg@stratuscom.com> wrote:

> There’s more than one possible container standard.  River-Container is as valid as
Rio, and is already part of River, having been developed inside the project.
> The standard I proposed is what is currently implemented by River-Container.  Rio’s
convention is very much different, and relies on reading jar files from a Maven repository
rather than from the local file system.  It represents a radical departure from the Service-Starter
conventions, although it is compatible with the services.

This is false. Rio provides the capability to declare a service be loaded either by artifact
resolution or by using declared jars. I have never moved away from the latter approach for
the simple reason that there are deployments that require legacy support.

Using an artifact to annotate a codebase, or to resolve a service's classpath provides significant
advancement in the build-deploy lifecycle for developers, and also provides performance benefits
when accessing a service's codebase (as well as addressing perm-gen oome for containers).

> You know, when I read Sam Chance’s email last night, and he commented "Further, the
idea of
> creating something that is not in the mainstream group thought process will be greeted
with lengthy and detailed rationale for why it's not the way to go”, and then "You will
very likely not garner support from others on this group“, I found it kind of depressing.
 I don’t want to believe that the River community is that fundamentally broken.  But it
appears he might be right.

I'm thinking that way too. For now, I am withdrawing my offer of donating Rio to River. My
intention was that it would greatly benefit River, by dramatically improving the out of box
experience. I'll be happy if River would just mention it as a notable project that may be
beneficial to developers getting to know River.

I'll also comment on your service archive standard, and if reasonable (and given time) I'll
provide support for it in Rio.


View raw message