Le mardi 12 juin 2007 à 19:08 -0700, Enrique Rodriguez a écrit : > On 6/12/07, Richard Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Stefano Bagnara wrote: > > > ... > > > Furthermore the current dns project has dependencies on shared-protocol > > > and other directory specific modules I don't even care of > > > understanding/compiling. > > > > > This is one complaint I had as well. I would definitely like to see a > > TLP called Apache DNS that produces a client and server. One option for > > the server could be to plugin to the Apache Directory for doing > > resolutions, but there definitely needs to be a greater level of > > abstraction than there is now. > > The protocol-dns store should be pretty separable today. We > identified an issue with transitive deps, but we addressed it within > the last 3 weeks. There should only be trivial deps on other > Directory artifacts, if any. Most of the deps come from simply using > Directory parent POMs, which makes sense for us, of course, since we > know our impl will be using our Directory back-end. > > In any case, with a move to MINA and breaking from the Directory > parent POM, it should be easy to make this lightweight. Because the > Directory deps are behind the store interface (RecordStore), the
It's true, but there is a dependency for some ADS code in 1 place. I need to remember and I send you the patch :) Anyway I compiled ADS DNS server without any other ADS code, with only 1 or 2 lines of patching. > server-side handler could go to MINA for those that want a lighter > server. Though, it's not much code and, therefore, it might not be > worth attempting to make a one-size-fits-all server handler. > > In any case, the focus should be on the asynch client since that is > the most pressing need. > > Enrique Julirn
