touching on thread hijack but; How does this work relate to the css modularization going on at the moment as well? It is proposed there to do merging at build time. Try to beat me if I am to much off topic, Daan
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:43 AM, Darren Shepherd <darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ah right, okay. So your talking about the order of the adapters. > Currently that is maintained as the order in the AdapterList in the > componentContext.xml. So what I've done is that extensions get added > to "Registries." Registries that need to be ordered can specify an > ordering configuration variable so that when the extensions are found > they are added to the list in a specific order. So the registry > definition for the auth stuff looks something like > > <bean id="userAuthenticatorsRegistry" > > class="org.apache.cloudstack.spring.lifecycle.registry.ExtensionRegistry"> > <property name="orderConfigKey" value="user.authenticators.order" /> > <property name="excludeKey" value="user.authenticators.exclude" /> > <property name="orderConfigDefault" > value="SHA256SALT,MD5,LDAP,PLAINTEXT" /> > </bean> > > So one can use user.authenticators.order to change the order and > user.authenticators.exclude to exclude certain extensions from being > used. The default value is also specified in that example. > > Darren > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Kelven Yang <kelven.y...@citrix.com> wrote: >> I understand that loading order can be completely solved by Spring with >> dependency injection, either within flat context or hierarchy context >> structure. But some sibling plugins in CloudStack do require a flexible >> way to declare ordering for runtime. For example, allocator plugins or >> authenticator plugins. The order itself is currently designated in their >> parent manager to reference to a ordered adapter list. >> >> This order semantics has nothing to do with dependency injection, but >> unfortunately in previous version of CloudStack, it does mix the >> requirement into injection framework and there are business logic relying >> on it. The fact for parent manager to compose ordering has made an >> assumption at compile/load time binding to subject plugins, which we don't >> want to see in the future since we want drop-in jar for plugins, what is >> our answer for this? >> >> Kelven >> >> >> On 9/23/13 1:40 PM, "Darren Shepherd" <darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>Siblings have no relationship to each other really. The load order >>>doesn't matter as one sibling has no visibility to another. Child >>>contexts are pretty much for plug-ins. Core components of ACS will >>>live in the core context as they are all interdependent. >>> >>>I will explain the whole Spring lifecycle though and how it works in the >>>model. >>> >>>Contexts are initialized from parent to child. So the top most parent >>>context is initialized first, then its child, then its grandchildren. >>>When a context is initialized the following happens in the below order >>> >>>1) All beans are instantiated >>>2) Dependencies are wire up (@Inject) >>>3) @PostConstruct is call for all beans in dependency graph order >>>4) Extensions are discovered an registered (so NetworkElement for >>>example will be discovered an registered as a NetworkElement) >>>5) configure() on all ComponentLifecycle beans will be called in the >>>getRunLevel() order >>> >>>Once all modules have been initialized in this fashion then in a >>>parent first child last order start() on all ComponentLifecycle beans >>>is called following the getRunLevel() order for the beans in the >>>context. >>> >>>Darren >>> >>> >>>On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Kelven Yang <kelven.y...@citrix.com> >>>wrote: >>>> Darren, >>>> >>>> Due to internal release work, I haven't got a chance to review it but >>>>I'm >>>> planning to do so later today and tomorrow. Before that, I have one >>>> question about hierarchy-orginzated context structure, could you >>>>elaborate >>>> an example to the ML on how two sibling plugins to declare their runtime >>>> load order? I'd like to get a feeling on how hard or easy for developers >>>> to do things that involve with structural change under the new hierarchy >>>> mode. >>>> >>>> Kelven >>>> >>>> >>>> On 9/23/13 12:19 AM, "Darren Shepherd" <darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com> >>>>wrote: >>>> >>>>>So how do I proceed forward on this? I basically already have this all >>>>>working. I'd really like to get it all committed as soon as possible if >>>>>there are no objections to the approach. The sooner the better. >>>>> >>>>>I already have a bunch of patches pending on review board that change a >>>>>bunch of random but related things. I need all of those patches >>>>>committed before I can submit the next round of patches. I have about 4 >>>>>or 5 more. What I'll do is that everything will get committed and then >>>>>their will be one small patch that will be last that flips some config >>>>>files to enable this all. All changes to code will work in both a >>>>>modular and monolithic spring context. So it will be really easy to >>>>>turn >>>>>this off if suddenly something goes terribly wrong. >>>>> >>>>>So I need people to agree this is good and then start >>>>>reviewing/committing my patches. I really want to get this wrapped up >>>>>this week if I can. >>>>> >>>>>Darren >>>>> >>>>>> On Sep 18, 2013, at 7:06 PM, Darren Shepherd >>>>>><darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes this is one of the many things this is trying to address. Adding >>>>>>a >>>>>>plugin should be plopping your jar in a directory and restarting. You >>>>>>pointed out two things I didn't think about though, command.properties >>>>>>and log4j xml. Let me think about those twos as they should be address >>>>>>also. Basically you should never have to edit a file that is packaged >>>>>>as part of ACS. Only add your artifacts to some directory, ideally >>>>>>just >>>>>>a jar. >>>>>> >>>>>> Darren >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 5:46 PM, SuichII, Christopher >>>>>>><chris.su...@netapp.com> wrote: >>>>>>> I've been following this conversation somewhat and would like to >>>>>>>throw >>>>>>>in some background as a plugin writer. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> One thing that concerns me in the current plugin model is the number >>>>>>>of XML/text files that need to be edited to deploy my plugin. >>>>>>> -applicationContext must be edited to add our PluginMangerImpl. >>>>>>> -commands.properties file must be edited to included the permissions >>>>>>>for the APIs we contributed. >>>>>>> -componentContext.xml & nonossComponentContext.xml must be edited to >>>>>>>add our Storage Subsystem Provider API. >>>>>>> -log4j-cloud.xml must be edited to ensure that our logger is enabled >>>>>>>and logging to our necessary default level. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I know our situation is a bit different than the current plug in >>>>>>>model, but I think it is something we, as a community, are going to >>>>>>>begin seeing more of. For a variety of reasons that I won't get in to >>>>>>>right now, our plugin will be closed source and kept separate from the >>>>>>>ACS source tree. We want our users to be able to simply drop in our >>>>>>>jar >>>>>>>file to the CS directory or run and installer and have it picked up by >>>>>>>the MS upon a restart. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It sounds like what you are proposing here would be very beneficial >>>>>>>to >>>>>>>plugins that are targeting a deployment model like this. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is this something you're looking/hoping/would like to solve, Darren? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Chris >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Chris Suich >>>>>>> chris.su...@netapp.com >>>>>>> NetApp Software Engineer >>>>>>> Data Center Platforms Cloud Solutions >>>>>>> Citrix, Cisco & Red Hat >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sep 18, 2013, at 6:44 PM, Darren Shepherd >>>>>>><darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> > I'm not a committer >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Frank Zhang >>>>>>><frank.zh...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >> Well. The codes explain more than words. >>>>>>> >> It seems the only extra work is adding a property file that >>>>>>>specifies >>>>>>> >> parent context and current context name, it's not much complex. >>>>>>> >> BTW: any reason for working on repo outside ACS? >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> >>> From: Darren Shepherd [mailto:darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com] >>>>>>> >>> Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 2:43 PM >>>>>>> >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >>>>>>> >>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Modularize Spring >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> If you want to see this all working you can just fetch the >>>>>>>"no-at-db4" >>>>>>> >>> branch at https://github.com/ibuildthecloud/cloudstack.git >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Plugin composes multiple modules. If modules are siblings they >>>>>>>can't >>>>>>> >> inject >>>>>>> >>> from each other. But a plugin can augment another module if it >>>>>>>chooses >>>>>>> >> to. >>>>>>> >>> The reality is that the core cloudstack is a tangled mess of >>>>>>> >> dependencies such >>>>>>> >>> that most of the core code can't be modularized as it stands. So >>>>>>>there >>>>>>> >> exists a >>>>>>> >>> context towards the top of the hierarchy called "core" that a lot >>>>>>>of jars >>>>>>> >>> contribute to it. Here is the full hierarchy right now. I'll >>>>>>>probably >>>>>>> >> rename a >>>>>>> >>> bunch of things, but this gives you an idea. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> bootstrap >>>>>>> >>> system >>>>>>> >>> core >>>>>>> >>> allocator >>>>>>> >>> allocator-server >>>>>>> >>> planner >>>>>>> >>> api-planner >>>>>>> >>> baremetal-planner >>>>>>> >>> explicit-dedication >>>>>>> >>> host-anti-affinity >>>>>>> >>> implicit-dedication-planner >>>>>>> >>> server-planner >>>>>>> >>> user-concentrated-pod-planner >>>>>>> >>> random-allocator >>>>>>> >>> api >>>>>>> >>> acl-static-role-based >>>>>>> >>> rate-limit >>>>>>> >>> server-api >>>>>>> >>> user-authenticator-ldap >>>>>>> >>> user-authenticator-md5 >>>>>>> >>> user-authenticator-plaintext >>>>>>> >>> user-authenticator-sha256salted >>>>>>> >>> backend >>>>>>> >>> alert-adapter-server-backend >>>>>>> >>> compute >>>>>>> >>> alert-adapter-server-compute >>>>>>> >>> baremetal-compute >>>>>>> >>> fencer-server >>>>>>> >>> investigator-server >>>>>>> >>> kvm-compute >>>>>>> >>> ovm-compute >>>>>>> >>> server-compute >>>>>>> >>> xenserver-compute >>>>>>> >>> network >>>>>>> >>> baremetal-network >>>>>>> >>> elb >>>>>>> >>> midonet >>>>>>> >>> nvp >>>>>>> >>> ovs >>>>>>> >>> server-network >>>>>>> >>> ssp >>>>>>> >>> storage >>>>>>> >>> alert-adapter-server-storage >>>>>>> >>> allocator-storage >>>>>>> >>> baremetal-storage >>>>>>> >>> secondary-storage >>>>>>> >>> server-storage >>>>>>> >>> storage-image-default >>>>>>> >>> storage-image-s3 >>>>>>> >>> storage-image-swift >>>>>>> >>> storage-volume-default >>>>>>> >>> storage-volume-solidfire >>>>>>> >>> template-adapter-server >>>>>>> >>> discoverer >>>>>>> >>> baremetal-discoverer >>>>>>> >>> discoverer-server >>>>>>> >>> ovm-discoverer >>>>>>> >>> xenserver-discoverer >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> If you look at the baremetal hypervisor plugin that is pretty >>>>>>>cross >>>>>>> >> cutting to >>>>>>> >>> most of ACS. So the modules it contributes to are as follows >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>resources/META-INF/cloudstack/baremetal-storage/spring-context.xml >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>resources/META-INF/cloudstack/baremetal-compute/spring-context.xml >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>resources/META-INF/cloudstack/baremetal-discoverer/spring-context.xml >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>resources/META-INF/cloudstack/core/spring-baremetal-core-context.xml >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>resources/META-INF/cloudstack/baremetal-planner/spring-context.xml >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>resources/META-INF/cloudstack/baremetal-network/spring-context.xml >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> So it creates child contextes of storage, compute, network, >>>>>>>planner, and >>>>>>> >>> discoverer to add its extensions where it needs to be. >>>>>>>Additionally, >>>>>>> >> you'll notice, >>>>>>> >>> it adds some beans to the core context from the file >>>>>>>resources/META- >>>>>>> >>> INF/cloudstack/core/spring-baremetal-core-context.xml. This is >>>>>>>because >>>>>>> >> it has >>>>>>> >>> some manager class that is used by multiple contexts. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Frank, I understand the scare that we are going too complex, but >>>>>>>do you >>>>>>> >> have >>>>>>> >>> some other suggestion? I don't like the idea of one gigantic >>>>>>>spring >>>>>>> >> context. So I >>>>>>> >>> feel I am making it as simple as I can while maintaining some >>>>>>>order. >>>>>>> >> People >>>>>>> >>> just need to create one or more spring xml files and a properties >>>>>>>files >>>>>>> >> that says >>>>>>> >>> where to put it in the hierarchy. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Additionally, by putting forcing people to put beans in certains >>>>>>>modules >>>>>>> >> it >>>>>>> >>> forces them to think about what is the role of the code. For >>>>>>>example, >>>>>>> >> today in >>>>>>> >>> ACS the *ManagerImpl classes are a huge mess. They implement too >>>>>>>many >>>>>>> >>> interfaces and the code crosses to many architectural boundaries. >>>>>>>Its >>>>>>> >> about >>>>>>> >>> time we start splitting things up to be more maintainable. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> If you have some time, please check out what I have on github. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Darren >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Frank Zhang >>>>>>><frank.zh...@citrix.com> >>>>>>> >>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> I am not against boundary, I am just against making things >>>>>>>unnecessary >>>>>>> >>>> complex to enable boundary. >>>>>>> >>>> If we are going this way, I hope we can make it as much as >>>>>>>transparent >>>>>>> >>>> to developers. That means, as a developer, all a plugin I need >>>>>>>to >>>>>>>do >>>>>>> >>>> is 1) provide my separate spring xml 2) inject beans I want >>>>>>>(valid >>>>>>> >>>> beans) in my bean and code business logic 3) compile to a jar >>>>>>>and >>>>>>>put >>>>>>> >>>> to some place designated by CloudStack. That's it. >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> I raise this topic because I have seen some projects to create >>>>>>> >>>> boundary making things horrible complex. And sometimes >>>>>>>developers >>>>>>>are >>>>>>> >>>> hurt by wrong boundaries, as a result, to overcome these >>>>>>>limitations >>>>>>> >>>> people write lots of ugly code which makes thing even worse. >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> However, I am still worry about if we can make things so >>>>>>>simpler. >>>>>>> >>>> For example, we may have an orchestration context that contains >>>>>>>major >>>>>>> >>>> beans needed by almost every plugin, this context can be easily >>>>>>>set >>>>>>> >>>> as parent context for all plugin contexts when bootstrap. >>>>>>>However, if >>>>>>> >>>> a plugin A needs to access some bean defined in plugin B, given >>>>>>>they >>>>>>> >>>> are sibling, how plugin framework resolves the dependency ? >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> >>>>> From: Darren Shepherd [mailto:darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com] >>>>>>> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 11:53 AM >>>>>>> >>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >>>>>>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Modularize Spring >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> I'm not for OSGi either, but contexts are quite useful and will >>>>>>>lead >>>>>>> >>>>> to >>>>>>> >>>> better >>>>>>> >>>>> things. First off, we don't want one gigantic spring XML >>>>>>>config >>>>>>> >>>>> file >>>>>>> >>>> like we have >>>>>>> >>>>> today. I think we can all agree on that. So each plugin will >>>>>>>have >>>>>>> >>>>> to >>>>>>> >>>> supply its >>>>>>> >>>>> own XML. So the obstacles you mention, will largely be just >>>>>>>that >>>>>>> >>>>> for >>>>>>> >>>> people. >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> With Spring it is really simple to just inject dependencies and >>>>>>> >>>>> cross architectural boundaries. Its currently everywhere in >>>>>>>ACS. >>>>>>> >>>>> You can't >>>>>>> >>>> just say >>>>>>> >>>>> we should review code and make sure nobody doesn't do bad >>>>>>>things. A >>>>>>> >>>> little bit >>>>>>> >>>>> of framework to enforce separation is a good thing. But I'm >>>>>>> >>>>> guessing >>>>>>> >>>> you will >>>>>>> >>>>> disagree with me there. >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> Here are some random points on why contexts are good. Say I >>>>>>>want to >>>>>>> >>>>> use Spring AOP or Spring TX in my plugin. With your own >>>>>>>context >>>>>>>you >>>>>>> >>>>> can >>>>>>> >>>> ensure >>>>>>> >>>>> that you won't screw with anybody else code by accidentally >>>>>>>having >>>>>>> >>>>> you pointcut match their bean. You don't have to worry about >>>>>>>bean >>>>>>> >>>>> name >>>>>>> >>>> conflicts. >>>>>>> >>>>> If two config files specify bean X, Spring will gladly just use >>>>>>>the >>>>>>> >>>>> last >>>>>>> >>>> one. I've >>>>>>> >>>>> already found multiply defined beans in ACS, but things still >>>>>>>just >>>>>>> >>>> happen to work. >>>>>>> >>>>> Having multiple contexts also defines initialization order. We >>>>>>>can >>>>>>> >>>> ensure that >>>>>>> >>>>> the framework is loaded and ready before child context are >>>>>>>loaded >>>>>>> >>>>> and >>>>>>> >>>> started. >>>>>>> >>>>> (we kind of do this today with ComponentLifeCycle, but its a >>>>>>>hack in >>>>>>> >>>>> my >>>>>>> >>>> mind). >>>>>>> >>>>> Additionally, when things start you will know, loading context >>>>>>> >>>>> "crapping >>>>>>> >>>> plug X". >>>>>>> >>>>> If spring fails to initialize, the issue it there. Today, if >>>>>>>spring >>>>>>> >>>> fails to start, it >>>>>>> >>>>> could be one of over 500 beans causing the weird problem. The >>>>>>>list >>>>>>> >>>>> goes >>>>>>> >>>> on >>>>>>> >>>>> and on. >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> Finally, this is the big one and why I really want contexts. I >>>>>>>have >>>>>>> >>>> some notes on >>>>>>> >>>>> the wiki [1] that you might want to read through. Basically I >>>>>>>want >>>>>>> >>>>> to >>>>>>> >>>> get to a >>>>>>> >>>>> more flexible deployment model that allows both a single >>>>>>>monolithic >>>>>>> >>>>> JVM >>>>>>> >>>> as >>>>>>> >>>>> today and also a fully distributed system. Having contexts in >>>>>>> >>>>> hierarchy >>>>>>> >>>> will >>>>>>> >>>>> enable me to accomplish this. By selecting which contexts are >>>>>>> >>>>> loaded at runtime will determine what role the JVM takes on. >>>>>>>The >>>>>>> >>>>> contexts help >>>>>>> >>>> people >>>>>>> >>>>> better understand how the distributed architecture will work >>>>>>>too, >>>>>>> >>>>> when >>>>>>> >>>> we get >>>>>>> >>>>> there. >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> Frank, trust me, I hate complex things. I don't want OSGi, >>>>>>> >>>>> classloader >>>>>>> >>>> magic, >>>>>>> >>>>> etc. But I do like organization and a little bit of framework >>>>>>>so >>>>>>> >>>>> that >>>>>>> >>>> people don't >>>>>>> >>>>> accidentally shoot themselves in the foot. I personally like >>>>>>> >>>>> knowing >>>>>>> >>>> that I >>>>>>> >>>>> couldn't have screwed something up, because the framework won't >>>>>>>even >>>>>>> >>>> allow >>>>>>> >>>>> it. If we separate everything as I want today, and then >>>>>>>tomorrow we >>>>>>> >>>>> say >>>>>>> >>>> this is >>>>>>> >>>>> way too much overhead, moving to a flat context is simple. >>>>>>>Don't >>>>>>> >>>>> think >>>>>>> >>>> we are >>>>>>> >>>>> on some slippery slope to classloaders and dependency hell. >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> Darren >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> [1] >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Nothing+to+see+ >>>>>>> >>>> her >>>>>>> >>>>> e...#Nothingtoseehere...-DeploymentModels >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Frank Zhang >>>>>>> >>>>> <frank.zh...@citrix.com>wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> What's the point in using separate spring context per plugin? >>>>>>> >>>>>> Separate class loader is the thing I hate most in OSGI, I am >>>>>>> >>>>>> afraid we are on the same way. >>>>>>> >>>>>> Frankly speaking, I never see benefits of this *separate* >>>>>>>model, >>>>>>> >>>>>> our project(or most projects) is not like Chrome which has to >>>>>>> >>>>>> create sandbox for extensions in order to avoid bad plugin >>>>>>>screws >>>>>>> >>>>>> up the whole browser(however, I still see bad plugins screw up >>>>>>>my >>>>>>> >>>>>> Chrome well). >>>>>>> >>>>>> Projects like CloudStack using plugin to decouple architecture >>>>>>> >>>>>> should not introduce many isolations to plugin writer, the >>>>>>>point >>>>>>> >>>>>> preventing wrong use of some components is not making much >>>>>>>sense >>>>>>> >>>>>> to me. If a plugin not following guide(if we have >>>>>>> >>>>>> it) we should kick it out, instead of making obstacles for 99% >>>>>>> >>>>>> good >>>>>>> >>>> people. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: Darren Shepherd [mailto:darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 10:33 AM >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Modularize Spring >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Right, component isn't a thing. I probably shouldn't use >>>>>>>that >>>>>>> >> term. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> >>>>>> want to >>>>>>> >>>>>>> standarize on the naming convention of plugin, module, and >>>>>>> >> extension. >>>>>>> >>>>>> It is >>>>>>> >>>>>>> explained a bit on the wiki [1] but I'll try to do a little >>>>>>> >>>>>>> better job >>>>>>> >>>>>> here. So a >>>>>>> >>>>>>> plugin is basically a jar. A jar contains multiple modules. >>>>>>> A >>>>>>> >>>>>>> modules >>>>>>> >>>>>> ends up >>>>>>> >>>>>>> being a spring application context that composes multiple >>>>>>> >>>>>>> configuration >>>>>>> >>>>>> files. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modules are assembled into a hierarchy at runtime. >>>>>>>Extensions >>>>>>> >>>>>>> are implementations of interfaces that exist in a module. A >>>>>>> >>>>>>> maven project produces a jar, so a plugin ends up being a >>>>>>>maven >>>>>>> >>>>>>> project >>>>>>> >>>> also. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So currently today we don't have a strong definition of >>>>>>>Plugin >>>>>>> >>>>>>> and I >>>>>>> >>>>>> hope to >>>>>>> >>>>>>> address that. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Darren >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Plug- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ins%2C+Modules%2C+and+Extensions >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 4:25 AM, Daan Hoogland >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> sounds great Darren, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> By component, you mean maven project or some larger chunk >>>>>>>like >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> distribution package? (did i miss this definition somewhere >>>>>>>or >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> do we define the components now?) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Daan >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 12:10 AM, Darren Shepherd >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> <darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Currently ACS code is fairly modular in that you can add >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> plug-ins to ACS >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> extend most functionality. Unfortunately ACS is not >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> packaged in a >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> modular >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> way. It is still delivered essentially as one large unit. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There are >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> many >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> reason for this but one large barrier to modularizing ACS >>>>>>>is >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> that the Spring configuration is managed as one large unit. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I propose that we break apart the Spring XML configuration >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> such that each component contributes its own configuration. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Additionally each component will be loaded into its own >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Spring ApplicationContext such that its beans will not >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> conflict with the wiring of other beans in ACS. This >>>>>>>change >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> will >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> lay the foundation for a richer plugin model and >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> additionally a more distributed architecture. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The technical details for this proposal can be found on the >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wiki >>>>>>> >>>> [1]. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Darren >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Modular >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ize+ >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Spri >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ng >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>> >>>> >>
