Re: [Gnue-dev] Halloween 5: Appserver Architecture

[Reinhard Mueller]

Am Son, 2002-11-03 um 17.01 schrieb Derek Neighbors:
> What I am not seeing here is that really method code should be the same
> as 2 tier trigger code.  I am highly concerned that this is pushed into
> appserver instead of into common in what currently is called triggers.

Sorry I forgot to mention this. We discussed it and we agreed on it.
Appserver will use the trigger code in Common, however IIRC Jan (who has
looked more closely at the trigger code than me) sees some need to
change, which he will do in Common, of course.

> > All Class Definitions are stored in the database and are accessible like
> > normal business objects.
> 
> I still think one should be able to store class definitions in flat
> files if that so fancies them.

It will be possible to export the class definitions to flat files and
import them from flat files respectively. This will be necessary (for
example) for putting our class definitions into CVS. You can't commit a
database table to CVS :-)

> > The Authentification Adapter can authentificate users against several
> > authorities. It could use PAM to check whether a username/password is
> > valid, or it could look up the username in an LDAP database, or it could
> > use an internal business object to store all valid users and their
> > passwords. In the latter case, it would use the Language Interface to
> > access these internal objects.
> 
> I hope we plan on using the authentication stuff that forms uses?  I
> think Jason created a 'plugin' of sorts that is in common.  If not the
> security wrapper should be the same for forms/reports/designer/appserver
> and part of common as to not 'redo' workd.

I didn't know that somethink like that exists. We will look at it.

> I skimmed VERY briefly so am only giving initial feedback.  Again my
> worry here is that all this stuff looks good, but basically seems to
> completely forget that the rest of GNUe exists.  

I can promise that this is not the case, and i am happy that we had Jan
taking part in the discussion who could care that we don't forget about
the rest :-)

> Please use trigger system in common.

Yes. We do.

> Please use trigger system in common.

Yes. We do. :-)

> Please use security wrapper in common or create one in common that all
> other products can use.

Ok. Thanks for this point, it seems I have missed that before.

> Please before doing any implementation lets make sure all of the core
> agrees.  Many of the concepts here are going directly against prior
> mission statements.  I am not saying that means they are not valid or
> that our mission may not have changed, but I'd rather get some concenus.

I am not sure if I see the points where we move away from prior mission
statements. I think some of the points were misunderstandings that I
could clear with this mail. Please let me know more about the other
points.

Thanks,
Reinhard

-- 
Reinhard Mueller
GNU Enterprise project
http://www.gnue.org

signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil