Re: [Tm4j-developers] TMNav and TM4Web

[Kal A. <ka...@te...>]

Yes, I think that it might be beneficial to have more modularity rather 
than less. One minor problem with increasing modularity is going to be 
in maintaining a proper decoupling between the modules. I think that as 
long as we make it the rule that each module includes the other 
libraries it needs as .jar files and that the build processes only uses 
those libraries (i.e. no sneaky use of paths to the CVS tree of other 
modules ;-) then we should be safe. I see this kind of thing in the 
Apache projects  - where for example you will find one project such as 
FOP settling on a build of another project such as the Commons and using 
that build in their project.

With this safe-guard in place I would say +1 to separating tmnav and 
panckoucke. As for kamal, I think I would prefer to leave that to 
Martin's judgement - but I think that by allowing projects like kamal to 
choose a build from the HEAD branch of the panckoucke module, it might 
actually make kamal development easier as the target would not move so 
often.

Does that make sense ?

Cheers,

Kal

Niko Schmuck wrote:

>Hi,
>
>While I agree completely with the separation of the tmnav and tm4web
>projects, I would like to make the suggestion to have a more clear
>distinction between panckoucke, tmnav and kamal. What do you think about
>spending each an own CVS module (maybe calling the two new ones
>'tm4access', 'tm4ws') ? This would mean basically moving panckoucke and
>kamal into an own directory structure, but I think the effort pays back
>in terms of easier packaging and reusability. And of course like Kal
>mentioned allowing own developing speeds for example for panckoucke and
>tmnav.
>
>Greetings,
>Niko
>
>
>  
>
>>Kal Ahmed wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>I think I can see where you are coming from. However, I think that the
>>>current division between tm4web and tmnav is about right (I'll come on
>>>to the possible changes later). Currently tmnav and tm4j follow
>>>different release schedules. This works because tmnav can make use of a
>>>particular TM4J release and it allows the two projects to continue at
>>>their own pace without one project having to wait for the other. While
>>>it is (I think) possible to branch part of a CVS module, I think it is
>>>generally much nicer to have separate modules for the separate
>>>deliverables so that each can be labelled when it reaches a release
>>>milestone. I think that it will be the case that tm4web will initially
>>>develop slower than tmnav is currently developing (that is inevitable
>>>because tm4web is in earlier stages at the moment) and I don't want
>>>tm4web development to become a drag factor on tmnav.
>>>
>>>To me, there is a nice logical distinction between the client-oriented
>>>presentational features of panckoucke and the tmnav application and the
>>>web publishing/web application features of tm4web. I can see them as
>>>being separate SourceForge downloads - tmnav for client-side developers,
>>>tm4web for server-side developers. 
>>>      
>>>
>>I agree with you Kal. At the current state of the two applications I think
>>it makes no sense to put them together in one project.
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>The one overlap is with kamal. Perhaps kamal should move into tm4web (or
>>>we should think about creating a tm4ws module perhaps) - but I guess
>>>that this depends upon how tightly tied kamal is to the panckoucke
>>>libraries and whether or not we could achieve a degree of independence
>>>like exists between tmnav and tm4j.
>>>      
>>>
>>Kamal is/will be a webservice-representation of a subset of the
>>    
>>
>panckoucke-Interface.
>  
>
>>So it depends on panckoucke at the moment. I'm working on the internal
>>    
>>
>interfaces at the time
>  
>
>>and it will be more independent of the navigation backend. But I'm not
>>    
>>
>sure if it makes
>  
>
>>really sense to decouple the two completely.
>>
>>It think the only overlap of tm4web and kamal is that both are server
>>    
>>
>side applications
>  
>
>>and both use a servlet engine to provide it's services. But the goals
>>    
>>
>of both are different:
>  
>
>>tm4web provides a web-based interface for 'users', kamal provides a
>>    
>>
>webservice based
>  
>
>>programming interface for 'user-applications'.
>>So what is the benefit, if we put tm4web and kamal together in one
>>    
>>
>project?
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies!
>Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships.
>Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more.
>www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp
>_______________________________________________
>Tm4j-developers mailing list
>Tm4...@li...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tm4j-developers
>
>
>  
>