Re: question re: Noel's idea for no rigid backend for photogallery

[Angela Cymbalak <a....@nechtan.org>]

Sorry for the flood of emails this morning.   I answered my own 
questions.  Thinking abstractly before 8:45 AM hurts my head...

I think the answer to the question should we provide a rigid backend 
structure or just an interface is a good question.  And I think that 
the answer is a qualified both.

In order to correctly provide a rigid backend structure you have to 
write an interface to it.  When starting from scratch that interface 
can be anything.  If it is designed in such a  way to be flexible 
then releasing it is no big deal.  This is the perfect solution for a 
larger enterprise.  They normally already have a structure that they 
need your code to fit into, not the other way around.  However, just 
as Carsten has done with Sling, it wouldn't be unheard of to then 
write a complete implementation around your interfaces that has a 
more rigid storage  structure.  This could then be released as a 
subproject.  It could either be an example or for those who need it, 
a fully functioning application.

Angie

At 08:27 AM 7/1/2008, you wrote:
>Noel,
>
>Can you dive into the idea a little more about not providing a 
>backend storage mechanism for the photo gallery?  Wouldn't JCR give 
>you the option of not having a rigid backend but be more 
>flexible?  If you provide interfaces, what would they interface with 
>on the backend?  Maybe all these questions are just because I 
>haven't had my coffee yet this morning but my brain is just not 
>wrapping around the idea.
>
>Angie
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: question re: Noel's idea for no rigid backend for photogallery

[Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>]

Angela Cymbalak schrieb:
> Sorry for the flood of emails this morning.   I answered my own 
> questions.  Thinking abstractly before 8:45 AM hurts my head...
> 
> I think the answer to the question should we provide a rigid backend 
> structure or just an interface is a good question.  And I think that the 
> answer is a qualified both.
> 
> In order to correctly provide a rigid backend structure you have to 
> write an interface to it.  When starting from scratch that interface can 
> be anything.  If it is designed in such a  way to be flexible then 
> releasing it is no big deal.  This is the perfect solution for a larger 
> enterprise.  They normally already have a structure that they need your 
> code to fit into, not the other way around.  However, just as Carsten 
> has done with Sling, it wouldn't be unheard of to then write a complete 
> implementation around your interfaces that has a more rigid storage  
> structure.  This could then be released as a subproject.  It could 
> either be an example or for those who need it, a fully functioning 
> application.
> 
Just my 2 cents on this issue: I don't know if its a good idea to 
provide an interface
for the backend and allow to exchange the backend using this interface.

But while this seems to be appealing from a pure architectual point of 
view, it has the drawback that this interface has to be defined 
accordingly *and* implemented which might be a major task. So, 
personally I would start simpler, e.g. with an existing api and impl 
(like JCR) and then get feedback and experience if something more 
abstract is required. This could be something for a 2.0 version :)

Carsten
-- 
Carsten Ziegeler
cziegeler@apache.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org