Ok, so you say we not to include your proposal for the multitenancy architecture as part of 0.1.0 (that was one of my questions below).
On 5 Jan 2011, at 11:17 , Mark Machielsen wrote: > Marcel wrote: > "Probably, but why not simply deploy a default User Admin implementation in > each tenant container?" > > Because we don't have the architecture for this in 0.1.0 and we need this for > BC. To my opinion we can indeed replace this by a useradmin per tenant > container transparently, when we have the infrastructure for container per > tenant. > > Greetings, > Mark. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: amdatu-developers-bounces at amdatu.org > [mailto:amdatu-developers-bounces at amdatu.org] On Behalf Of Marcel Offermans > Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 9:59 AM > To: amdatu-developers at amdatu.org > Subject: Re: [Amdatu-developers] Multi-tenancy (and more) design > > On 5 Jan 2011, at 8:48 , Mark Machielsen wrote: > >> Ok, after all discussion, I want to propose the following: >> >> Choice for multitenancy architecture: >> - by default (and that's what we are going to promote) applications on top >> of Amdatu are developed as tenantunaware >> - such bundles are running in a tenant osgi container >> - when there are good reasons (for example large services, like shindig) a >> developer can decide to make the service tenant aware >> - the service will be running in a tenant unaware container and will be >> offered in the tenant container via remote services (in the service fabric >> layer) > > Agreed. > >> We can however phase the implementation of the multitenancy concept. >> >> Proposal for 0.1: >> - describe the multitenancy concept at the wiki > > Ok. > >> - leave the implementation for multitenancy to the current implementation: >> no support for tenant unaware services in a tenant container, support for >> tenantaware services > > I am not sure what you intend to say here. Can you clarify this a bit? Are > you proposing not to implement the the proposal above for 0.1? > >> - plan the full multitenancy application in the roadmap > > Fair enough, if we all agree on the proposal above, we can start working > towards it. > >> - implement the other items for 0.1: >> - tenantaware useradmin: this is possible with the current implementation we >> use by adding an adapter (according to Bram) > > Probably, but why not simply deploy a default User Admin implementation in > each tenant container? > >> - Cluster support and backup support for Cassandra > > Sounds like a big one! > >> - JIRA mandatory issues > > Did we already tag those? > > Greetings, Marcel > > > > _______________________________________________ > Amdatu-developers mailing list > Amdatu-developers at amdatu.org > http://lists.amdatu.org/mailman/listinfo/amdatu-developers > > _______________________________________________ > Amdatu-developers mailing list > Amdatu-developers at amdatu.org > http://lists.amdatu.org/mailman/listinfo/amdatu-developers
