On Tue, 21 Aug 2001, Leo Simons wrote:
> ...aren't well-defined at all. Methinks.
>
> Here is how it could be:
>
> /---------------------\
> | Client Application | runs within Velocity/Turbine/Tomcat/JVM, uses all
> |---------------------|
> | Velocity | runs within Tomcat, uses Turbine/Tomcat/toolkits
> |---------------------|
> | Turbine | runs within Tomcat, uses Tomcat/Avalon/toolkits
> |---------------------|
> | Tomcat | runs within Avalon Phoenix, uses Avalon
> Phoenix/toolkits
> |---------------------|
> | Avalon Phoenix | runs on top of rest of Avalon, uses toolkits
> |---------------------|
> | Avalon Framework / |
> | Excalibur / |
> | Cornerstone / |
> | LogKit | uses toolkits
> |---------------------|
> | Toolkits: |
> | Jakarta-utils / |
> | Log4J / |
> | Jakarta Commons /|
> | Jakarta ORO / |
> | Jakarta JMX / |
> | XML Xalan |
> \---------------------/
>
> Avalon is the lowest-level Java project
> at Jakarta. It provides things other
> server apps need, like pooling, connections,
> logging, etc.
>
> Tomcat is a low level server application
> that serves as a bridging facilitator
> between Java and internet technologies
> such as HTTP, WML, XML, etc. It does so
> using 2 java standards: servlets (yay!)
> and JSP (messy).
>
> Turbine is a framework to make it easier
> to bridge enterprise applications and
> internet technologies. It runs within
> Tomcat as a servlet, where tomcat creates
> half of that bridge (the HTTP/XML side).
>
> Velocity is a templating engine that can
> run withing Turbine.
>
> The Client application uses all these
> different toolkits, frameworks and engines
> to create his internet portal, enterprise
> application, etc.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> Part of this is already true. But there is a
> large duplication of code and effort across
> the various projects.
>
> There are three server frameworks (Avalon,
> Tomcat, Turbine), they have three pooling
> systems, two application expansion systems
> (catalina and camelot).
> They all provide services. Avalon does
> deployment, so does tomcat. Turbine, Avalon
> and tomcat all do logging using one of the
> two toolkits.
>
> Just by looking at class names and pattern
> descriptions, this is obvious.
>
> More concrete: doing a search across apache
> sources for "Service.java" gives 6 results.
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> I've stated a lot of the obvious here, left
> things (hey, where's cocoon? or james? or
> Xalan?) out of the picture. If you forget that,
> you'll probably agree. Right?
>
> Now the question is: do we wish to remove
> all that duplication of efforts, create a
> logical "separation of concerns" between
> projects?
>
> Probably: yes.
>
> I was just wondering how we're going to do
> that.
And this is probably the hardest part of it. Since we are all individuls
here doing things on a voluntary basis and have our very own preferences
(babies) this we almost never happen. If Apache would run "commercial"
procedure we clearly had less overlay between the projects and some guys
from the IT architecture department will tell the other guys in the
development department what they had to use for their apps. And the
management clearly knows that human resources are the most costly factor
in the IT departments! This is what Apache doesn't have to pay for and
thus have to allow much more individuality for every one of us.
Giacomo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
