Mailing-List: contact dev-help@river.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@river.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy includes SPF record at
 spf.trusted-forwarder.org)
From: =?utf-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBLxYJlY3plaw==?= <michal.kleczek@xpro.biz>
To: dev@river.apache.org
Subject: Re: River-436 - need some explanation of preferred class provider
Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2014 22:54:57 +0100
Message-ID: <3385989.DM6O1PcaKA@mkleczek-laptop>
Organization: XPro Sp. z o. o.
User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/3.11.10-7-desktop; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <1715328B-8FCA-40E5-8C25-8EB69F0F477B@cox.net>
References: <5313816B.9030703@xpro.biz>
 <F2F5073B-DE15-461C-A23B-D96F09EC2E56@wonderly.org>
 <1715328B-8FCA-40E5-8C25-8EB69F0F477B@cox.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="nextPart1716649.e274GEmRRP"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

--nextPart1716649.e274GEmRRP
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

The whole point of my example is that the client has no knowledge of Ut=
il=20
interface - it is simply not interested in it.

The problem is not that the client cannot plug-in RMIClassProvider=20
dynamically. It is just that with current format of codebase annotation=
 the=20
client cannot do anything. It simply does not have enough data to decid=
e what=20
to do - just two lists of URLs without any dependency information encod=
ed.

Regards,

On Sunday, March 09, 2014 02:33:03 PM Gregg Wonderly wrote:
> All you have to provide in the client is a class loading implementati=
on that
> knows about Util and pins it into a parent class loader from the clas=
s
> loaders that proxies load.  I netbeans, this happens because meta dat=
a
> declares that such a relationship exists.  In OSGi, this happens beca=
use
> meta data declares that such a relationship exists.  All you have to =
do, is
> create meta data that specifies that such a relationship exists, and =
then
> plug in a River-336 compatible class loading implementation in your c=
lient.
>=20
> My point is no that River-336 provides the answer, but rather it prov=
ides a
> mechanism that an application can use.  Not every application has suc=
h a
> need, and not every known implementation uses the same model.  Thus, =
there
> isn=E2=80=99t a single answer that can exist ahead of time.
>=20
> If you want to use OSGi, plug it in.  If you want to use Netbeans, pl=
ug it
> in.   If you want to use both at the same time, work it out and plug =
it in.
>  There is room for a single standard to eventually win.  But, there i=
sn=E2=80=99t a
> single standard that is standing alone right now that I see.
>=20
> Gregg Wonderly

--=20
Micha=C5=82 K=C5=82eczek
XPro Sp. z o. o.
ul. Borowskiego 2
03-475 Warszawa
Polska
--nextPart1716649.e274GEmRRP
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename*=UTF-8''Micha%C5%82%20K%C5%82eczek%20%28XPro%29%2Evcf
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/vcard; charset="utf-8";
 name*=utf-8''Micha%C5%82%20K%C5%82eczek%20%28XPro%29%2Evcf

BEGIN:VCARD=0D
ADR;TYPE=3Dpref;TYPE=3Dwork:;;ul. Borowskiego 2;Warszawa;;03-475;Poland=
=0D
EMAIL:michal.kleczek@xpro.biz=0D
FN:Micha=C5=82 K=C5=82eczek=0D
N:K=C5=82eczek;Micha=C5=82;;;=0D
ORG:XPro Sp. z o. o.=0D
UID:Zp8UeLZmq5=0D
VERSION:3.0=0D
END:VCARD=0D
=0D

--nextPart1716649.e274GEmRRP--