Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tuscany.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@tuscany.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of enjoyjava@gmail.com designates
 209.85.160.53 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=subject:references:from:content-type:x-mailer:in-reply-to
         :message-id:date:to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version;
        b=ArO6PloYVRe1b0iZORMHml/bX9d0aWY7T3A5MkabMfLM6uoy9ZHOHUFng8viyooWen
         wSqLnpIldvsx3ow1ZrF9PCxNH+YW9bPIJTEJhFAw3EsDTMOI8yBRYEv2c0bgYlhll+jr
         wNLm8yPQGQ1vV6mRsy4RPd2tWL6QlD2PMDE5w=
Subject: Re: Node2 vs Node, parallel universes? Sample tuscany launcher shell
References: <4C2E64DF.1030306@apache.org>
 <AANLkTin6v0apWJW3m8M3cPkDqbBC0UmI48fJkA2tXoGf@mail.gmail.com>
 <4C30ECB5.7020100@apache.org>
 <AANLkTimGCMey3GtxrSo-gDEkRyOO6KVLyq7j2HvPBzaq@mail.gmail.com>
 <4C356CE2.9070303@apache.org>
 <AANLkTilASAG5c4YuWe30bYelPV42lYVDy7YklajCzZa3@mail.gmail.com>
From: Raymond Feng <enjoyjava@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTilASAG5c4YuWe30bYelPV42lYVDy7YklajCzZa3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-Id: <10E37E9F-0841-4B27-B7CD-40B977993431@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 08:31:56 -0700
To: "dev@tuscany.apache.org" <dev@tuscany.apache.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 8A293)

Hi,

We had a debate on this topic. See:

http://osdir.com/ml/dev-tuscany.apache.org/2010-06/msg00164.html

And apparently, we didn't reach agreement.=20

I think it would be a good idea to agree on the commands for shell. This wil=
l help us understand how users use SCA. Then it can be translated into a set=
 of API/SPIs. Mixing different steps into one layer could prevent us from se=
eing the complete user story.

Raymond Feng
Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 7, 2010, at 11:53 PM, ant elder <ant.elder@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 7:14 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
> <jsdelfino@apache.org> wrote:
>=20
>>=20
>> I'm confused as you've switched o.a.t.node.NodeFactory to a different
>> o.a.t.node2.NodeFactory. I see 49 references to node.NodeFactory in the
>> source tree, everywhere people need to create nodes. node2.NodeFactory lo=
oks
>> like a parallel implementation, with only 3 references, if I'm not mistak=
en
>> only from this new shell. What happened?
>>=20
>=20
> The domain-node module is new is why its not used much yet and its
> based more closely on the operations described in the Assembly spec. I
> like it, and plan to start using it instead of the old Node APIs now.
> It also supports more than the old Node API so you can do things that
> you otherwise can't.
>=20
>> Also this new shell seems to use a single node. It's fine with me if that=
's
>> what you want to do here, but that's not what I need. What I need is a
>> collection of independent nodes, each loaded with a deployable composite,=

>> each with its own lifecycle, like I had in the original code.
>>=20
>=20
> What is that you need a node for? This does give you independent
> deployable composites each with its own lifecycle so whats missing?
> I'm wondering if its just that the current commands and help
> information on them isn't very clear yet so its not so obvious to you
> what this is doing.
>=20
>   ...ant