Hi Peter,
as far as I know the following Avalon-based services are currently used
within Turbine CVS HEAD
* org.apache.torque.avalon.Torque
* org.apache.fulcrum.cache.GlobalCacheService
* org.apache.fulcrum.mimetype.MimeTypeService
* org.apache.fulcrum.crypto.CryptoService
* org.apache.fulcrum.localization.LocalizationService
* org.apache.fulcrum.intake.IntakeService
* org.apache.fulcrum.factory.FactoryService
And those service are run within the YAAFI Avalon Container. But Fulcrum
has a lot more of released services being linked to Turbine such as
* XML-RPC Service
* an improved Security Service
* and a few more
Currently only a few non-critical Fulcrum services are used - I think
the PMCs should decide how many Fulcrum services should go into Turbine
2.4 .... Henning, Eric ?!
What I would like to do for a release is
* Migrate all existing Fulcrum services to use the Fortress Context
(that much about Avalon Container interoperability)
* Integrate or help integrating the upcoming Fortress release as
second Avalon container if it is not too much of a hassle (maybe a
Fortress wizard can lend a hand)
* Release a new XML-RPC Fulcrum Service based on the XML-RPC 2.0 and
push it into Turbine 2.4 (this is just a personal preference)
Cheers,
Siegfried Goeschl
Peter Courcoux wrote:
Hi Thomas,
I think it depends on what the patches are. 2.4 is already using some
of the fulcrum components. Patches for these should be converted into
patches against the fulcrum components.
With the other services, where 2.4 is still using the embedded
version, I am not sure. I think that there has already been a lot of
work done creating fulcrum components for the embedded services and
these may be complete. If so the work left to do is to remove the
embedded services code from turbine and get things working again with
the fulcrum replacements. Again the best way to proceed would probably
be to patch the fulcrum component.
If there is, as yet, no fulcrum equivalent for a service, it needs to
be written and I would guess that the starting point would be to copy
the necessary classes from the 2.4 source tree. In this case patching
the 2.4 source tree would probably be appropriate.
I hope that this makes sense.
Peter
Thomas Vandahl wrote:
Peter Courcoux wrote:
I don't know if anyone else is working on the 2.4 codebase at the
moment. Personally, I am using CVS head but I have been responsible
for some of the bigger changes since 2.3 so it is easier for me. I
would like to see all the embedded services replaced by fulcrum
services before a release and I suspect that this is not a five
minute job. I am gradually making progress.
I have some patches and extensions to (embedded) Turbine services
against the 2.3.1 code base. I assume from your statement that no
extensions are planned in this area and I need to convert my patches
to the Fulcrum components. Is that correct?
Bye, Thomas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
