Mail Archive Home | deployment List | May 2004 Index
<-- Date Index --> | <-- Thread Index --> |
Richard S. Hall wrote: > This really depends on whether the purpose is to create a > deployment infrastructure for deploying Fractal-based applications > or if the purpose is to create a more general deployment middleware > (at least for Java), where Fractal-based applications are just one > type of application to be deployed. > > If the purpose is only for Fractal-based applications and the only > types of dependencies that exist among "packages" are > component-oriented dependencies (i.e., containment and binding), > then it probably doesn't make a difference what you call it. I hope it will be possible to create a deployment infrastructure for deploying Fractal-based applications that can also deploy arbitrary (Java and non Java) applications. This is not contradictory: it just imply that arbitrary applications can be seen as Fractal-based applications (and this should be possible since the Fractal model is modular, extensible, and not tied to Java; for example, plain old Java objects are compliant with Fractal level 0). Or, in other terms, that existing packaging formats can be seen as Fractal packages (and, in particular, that their dependencies can be seen as Fractal "containment and binding" dependencies - hence this mail http://www.objectweb.org/wws/arc/fractal/2004-05/msg00005.html). Or, in yet other terms, I think our goal is to define a Fractal [ADL] based packaging format that can handle arbitrary applications, and a deployment infrastructure dedicated to this packaging format (concretely, this infrastructure will not be able to deploy OSGi bundles directly, but it will be possible to convert a bundle into a Fractal package, like it is possible to convert a .rpm into a .deb). Note that a general deployment layer for Java would be very interesting in order to implement this "dedicated" infrastructure. However I think we will first concentrate on a deployment infrastructure for Java based applications that are also compliant with Fractal at level 3. We will then look at arbitrary Java applications, and then, perhaps, at non Java applications. Note that these are just personal opinions about the goals and the strategy for "Fractal packaging". I would like to have other opinions about what the goals and the strategy should be. Eric
<-- Date Index --> | <-- Thread Index --> |
Powered by MHonArc.
Copyright © 1999-2005, ObjectWeb Consortium | contact | webmaster.