there is an ongoing discussion to make APLAWS standards compliant, i.e.
- Java persistence layer according to Java Content Repository (JSR 170)
- Portlet specification (JSR-168)
- Java Server Pages to replace Bebop
- war / ear file for distribution/installation replacing the ccm scripts
Because these modifications will break the current API those modifications will not make it into any 1.x release.
But currently there exists no systematic planing or discussion.
Alan seems to get his teeth especially into the persistence layer and the war files.
We at Bremen were discussing the JSP issue but came to the conclusion that JSP in the current version dos not fit to the XSLT approach. We should wait until the current discussion about the next version of the specification will have finished.
A switch to portlets according to JSR-168 might be quite a radical surgery I suppose. As a first step we would need a sort of "white paper" analysing the current status and the (grade of) monolithic structure.
Peter
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Has anyone looked at or thought about making APLAWS+ compliant with JSR168 (Portlet Specification) so that third party portlets can be used, e.g. http://www.syncex.com/portlet_catalog/portlet_catalog.htm, http://labs.jboss.com/portletswap/portlet_main.html, http://wiki.liferay.com/index.php/JSR168_Portlets_Roster, and so on.
Regards,
Terry
I guess Alan Pevec is your best bet for an answer here.
Terry,
there is an ongoing discussion to make APLAWS standards compliant, i.e.
- Java persistence layer according to Java Content Repository (JSR 170)
- Portlet specification (JSR-168)
- Java Server Pages to replace Bebop
- war / ear file for distribution/installation replacing the ccm scripts
Because these modifications will break the current API those modifications will not make it into any 1.x release.
But currently there exists no systematic planing or discussion.
Alan seems to get his teeth especially into the persistence layer and the war files.
We at Bremen were discussing the JSP issue but came to the conclusion that JSP in the current version dos not fit to the XSLT approach. We should wait until the current discussion about the next version of the specification will have finished.
A switch to portlets according to JSR-168 might be quite a radical surgery I suppose. As a first step we would need a sort of "white paper" analysing the current status and the (grade of) monolithic structure.
Peter