Re: [Proxool-developer] Getting ready for 1.0

[Bill H. <bi...@lo...>]

On Mon, 2003-02-24 at 12:19, mar...@sy... wrote:

> Would an XML-RPC or SOAP interface be useful for remote management of
> pools? 

Sounds interesting. I don't know much about XML-RPC/SOAP though.

> I guess just implementing the ProxoolFacade class? 

Well, ProxoolFacade isn't an interface :) It could use ProxoolFacade if
it liked.

> Might be a useful option to handle to support the switching of
> database URLs in failover situations on non-servlet solutions (i.e.
> bundle with the driver, and activate via XML or Properties). 

We already allow switching of databases: either programmatically, or
with the upcoming JMX component or with the next version of
AdminServlet. If you mean _automatic_ switching then this is something
that Del Simmons has been talking about for a while. It would be really
cool and will probably be in 1.1.

> Other thoughts is looking at other "delfacto" frameworks like Struts,
> Maverin, etc, and see what simple hooks we can provide to make
> integration seemless. 

I know Struts quite well and I can't really think of anything we could
do that isn't already provided by the AdminServlet. We could produce a
Struts version of the AdminServlet (called, say, AdminAction) but it
would just end up duplicating AdminServlet. (Background: AdminServlet
does everything in a very simple way: HTML is coded in the Java class,
request parameters are extracted manually. All the things that would
make a servlet app a nightmare, and how we used to do it a long time
ago. However, because the scope of the servlet isn't very much, the
advantages we get in very simple configuration - no JSPs - outweigh
this, I believe.)

We do already provide an AvalonConfigurator. What's Maverin?

> Also I've been using Hibernate (http://hibernate.sf.net) lately, and
> have contributed a little documentation and feedback on version 2.0
> which is still in beta. Would be nice to provide a Proxool integration
> as one of the pool managers it would use. I'll look into maybe working
> on this.

I'd be interested to learn how we can integrate with Hibernate. Doesn't
it just rely on any JDBC driver, or is it more complicated than that?

---

I think my question could actually be better rephrased as: "are there
any changes/features that should be in 1.0 rather than later?" Or to
attempt that again, "what are the objectives of a 1.0 release?" I would
suggest the miniumum is:

1) Robustness: no critical bugs (we have no bugs at all just now)

2) Fixed API (we have already fixed the API so that code that works with
0.7 will (probably) work with 1.0.

3) Very good documentation. We're nearly there with this. Even closer
with DocBook. 

4) Easy configuration. I think we are there with 0.7.

So, the list beyond that is just additional features that make us
competitive with the other pools. Like JMX (coming in 0.8), SOAP?, and
so on.

My opinion is that we shouldn't try and squeeze much more into 1.0 and
we should plant our feet firmly in the ground and say "it's ready!".

> Hey, dreamer boy get back to your documentation!

Keep up with the good work, Martin!

Cheers,
-- 
  Bill Horsman
  Proxool
  http://proxool.sourceforge.net
  ICQ: 119577180