james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Soren Hilmer <soren.hil...@tietoenator.com>
Subject Re: SpringJames vs. JamesNG
Date Fri, 01 Apr 2005 07:52:49 GMT
On Thursday 31 March 2005 17:59, Serge Knystautas wrote:
> Soren Hilmer wrote:
> > Serge recently posted a mail to server-user saying that a container
> > switch was a minor concern of ours (or at least something to that
> > extent).
> > I disagree on this, I believe that we have to make a decission on the
> > container issue, to both keep existing comitters interested and possible
> > attract new skilled people.
>
> I'll restate since it must have been unclear... WHICH new container we
> move to is not important at this phase of development since we have to
> change our current code to a bunch of POJOs.

Ahh, we agree then!
>
> > The container issue is by far the one thing that is keeping myself from
> > doing commits into James. I hate doing something today and having to redo
> > it all over in a month or two.
>
> I'm in the same camp.
>
> > I tried to follow the discussion on JamesNG a while back, but as I at
> > that time had little knowledge of neither Groovy nor Spring, I did not
> > comment.
> >
> > I have now done some reading on the two subjects and believe that Spring
> > is the way to go for James. My main concern on JamesNG (I know this is
> > not Groovy related) is the CDI principle IMO this principle leads to
> > constructor bloat if you want to have some properties with default
> > values, and I believe we do.
> > The Spring framework's Java-Bean approach is IMO a way better solution to
> > the POJO-ification issue.
>
> How are you seeing JavaBean != POJO?  I've always used them as
> synonymous, except JavaBean's also has weird setter propertyeditor API
> for setAsText stuff.

No, I see (as you) JavaBean==POJO, but CDI!=JavaBean. And I prefer using the 
JavaBean approach instead of CDI. 
My concern is that CDI does not facilitate optional properties very well.
If you have some POJO, with just 2 optional properties that will lead to 4 
constructors!! This is what I call constructor bloat.

>
> > Now I have started to convert James into POJO's the Spring way (only
> > James.java so far), but as I stated above I hate doing things over, so
> > let us take a vote. Is it going to be SpringJames or JamesNG.
>
> Could you explain what the differences are?

The difference is CDI vs. JavaBean, just that.

Someone asked for a road-map:
1. POJOification
2. Possibly taking ownership over a few Phoenix things
3. Making a SpringConfiguration which does the same as our current 
configuration.
4. Test
5. Celebrate

But I see this as done in concert, as you probably need to do 2. while doing 
1.
And doing 3. afterwards is probably too tiresome.

--Søren

-- 
Søren Hilmer, M.Sc.
R&D manager		Phone:	+45 72 30 64 00
TietoEnator IT+ A/S	Fax:	+45 72 30 64 02
Ved Lunden 12		Direct:	+45 72 30 64 57
DK-8230 Åbyhøj		Email:	soren.hilmer <at> tietoenator.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org


Mime
View raw message