Thanks for the response Jay I was leaning towards #1 as well, as it makes each of those independent products more internally complete (i.e. CMIS compatible) rather than cobbling them all together at the single integration layer.
Of course, this approach would create additional layers (potential points of failure, more infrastructure, possible performance impacts, etc) so it’s not a decision I’d make lightly. In general my preference would be for the product specific CMIS layer to run “in process” within the product for these reasons. That being said, it’s not uncommon to add mediation layers, so we’d just need to work through this (I’m thinking CMIS on an API gateway rather than a separate java application layer, might be more palatable in the longer term - if we do any work here I’ll contribute it back). Re the federating bridge… I had assumed that the OpenCMIS bridge already does this? i.e. I thought that was the point of using the bridge :) Have to admit I haven’t looked in any detail yet. We would absolutely look to contribute back any enhancements we make. Thanks! Hope the ideas keep flowing! - Casey From: Jay Brown [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, 3 July 2014 3:17 AM Cc: '[email protected]' Subject: Re: OpenCMIS Server or Bridge or Both These sorts of decisions are being faced by many of our customers as well. In this case I think I would lean towards #1, since it seems you would be writing code that would be re-useable in other situations as well. e.g. The two new server implementations you would build could likely be used for other purposes and an openCMIS server for a ECM provider that does not currently support CMIS, would likely come in handy later if you will continue to use that system in production. Not to mention all of the other customers that use that system. (if you were to post your implementation on github this may encourage the vendor to step up) In the case of the federating bridge. If you did produce a CMIS Bridge based server that would dynamically (based on a list of CMIS server service URLs in a config file) federate CMIS 1.0 and 1.1 services. This would be something that would be a welcome contribution back to Apache Chemistry. [Inactive hide details for "BUTTERWORTH, Casey" ---07/01/2014 07:01:55 PM---Hi all, Looking for some architecture guidance based]"BUTTERWORTH, Casey" ---07/01/2014 07:01:55 PM---Hi all, Looking for some architecture guidance based on what people have found to work best in their From: "BUTTERWORTH, Casey" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Date: 07/01/2014 07:01 PM Subject: OpenCMIS Server or Bridge or Both ________________________________ Hi all, Looking for some architecture guidance based on what people have found to work best in their environments / what the community considers best practice. (Hypothetical) situation: --------------------------- * The ECM ecosystem consists of multiple ECM providers: (a) A well known ECM product with CMIS v1.0 support (b) A lesser known ECM product without CMIS support (but heavily integrated into other off-the-shelf core business applications via proprietary APIs) (c) A bespoke Amazon S3 centric solution without CMIS support (but the applications owners are trying to determine whether to add CMIS 1.1 support to this) (d) An external SaaS ECM provider with CMIS v1.1 support (also use Sharepoint for general team sites and project collateral, but do not consider this part of ECM) * Across these providers, there are different numbers of repositories and degrees of utilisation: - Well known ECM vendor with CMIS = 16 repositories; 15 million content objects - Well known ECM vendor without CMIS = 3 (big) repositories; 1.5 million content objects - S3 centric solution = 32 repositories; 320 million content objects - External SaaS provider = 7 repositories but ever growing; 400,000 content objects * Our architectural objective is to have a single CMIS endpoint to provide a federated view across all of these, so that we can provide (amongst other things): - A single point of truth for our "list of ECM repositories" - i.e. we want the "getRepositories" CMIS service to return all ~58+ repositories across all providers, and interact with any of these, through the same API. - A single integration point for our image capture and doc gen systems to store the content they create - A single integration point for all content centric applications to use to interact with ECM - A single viewer to roll out across our internal user community, hopefully using an existing CMIS viewer - A single mobile client for staff to interact with ECM (lets assume via VPN into internal network... but keen to hear other approaches) hopefully using an existing CMIS mobile viewer - A single external portal implementation to expose content from ECM - A generic file system syncing component to interact with all ECM repositories that can be rolled out to all of our staff (hopefully using an existing CMIS file sync tool) - A generic sharepoint web part for surfacing content from ECM repositories as required in team sites (hopefully using an existing CMIS webpart) - A mechanism to isolate systems and users from any details of independent providers, to allow for subsequent consolidation behind the API (please feel free to add your own uses cases to the conversation as well) My Question: ----------------- Would you recommend: (1) separate OpenCMIS Server implementations in front of the 2 non-CMIS providers, and then a single OpenCMIS Bridge implementation in front of all 4? (2) implementing a single OpenCMIS server to act as a bridge to all 4 (and not use the OpenCMIS bridge whatsoever)? (3) implementing a single OpenCMIS bridge to act as a bridge all 4 (and not build any custom OpenCMIS servers whatsoever)? (4) something else entirely? Other Conversation Points: --------------------------------- * Any thoughts on using something like as part of this (http://www.mulesoft.com/cloud-connectors/cmis-integration-connector) Look forward to the discussion! ________________________________ This e-mail is sent by Suncorp Group Limited ABN 66 145 290 124 or one of its related entities "Suncorp". Suncorp may be contacted at Level 28, 266 George Street, Brisbane or on 13 11 55 or at suncorp.com.au. The content of this e-mail is the view of the sender or stated author and does not necessarily reflect the view of Suncorp. The content, including attachments, is a confidential communication between Suncorp and the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, interference with, disclosure or copying of this e-mail, including attachments, is unauthorised and expressly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please contact the sender immediately and delete the e-mail and any attachments from your system. ________________________________ This e-mail is sent by Suncorp Group Limited ABN 66 145 290 124 or one of its related entities "Suncorp". Suncorp may be contacted at Level 28, 266 George Street, Brisbane or on 13 11 55 or at suncorp.com.au. The content of this e-mail is the view of the sender or stated author and does not necessarily reflect the view of Suncorp. The content, including attachments, is a confidential communication between Suncorp and the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, interference with, disclosure or copying of this e-mail, including attachments, is unauthorised and expressly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please contact the sender immediately and delete the e-mail and any attachments from your system.
