[Opensource] 4.2 Discussion - Configuration Files

[Brent McGaugh]

Mike,

I think it is a great idea. It would also be nice to have the ability to 
create a database context for use solely by that component in the XML file. 
As you mentioned in your response to the Forum topic I created on this 
subject ("Managing multiple databases and applications"  2002-02-19), there 
is a security risk, but if your going to implement the XML configuration it 
might be worthwhile to find a way to close the security hole and allow per 
component database context configuration in the same XML file.

Thanks,

Brent McGaugh



At 03:30 AM 6/23/02 -0700, you wrote:
>Hey All,
>
>I've been thinking about various aspects of expresso and thought about how 
>I'd very much like to see Schema files simply become XML files.  We could 
>keep the Schema class for people that need the flexibility, but most 
>schemas are simply read-only glue that could be easily defined in an xml 
>file with something like so:
>
><expresso-component active="true" title="MyTitle" 
>messages="/com/jcorporate/expresso/core">
>         <dbobjects>
>                 <dbobj class="blah blah"/>
>                        .....
>         </dbobjects>
>         <controllers>
>                 <controller class="blah blah"/>
>         </controllers>
></expresso-component>
>
>Notice that I didn't call it a schema?  That's because in reality, 
>Schema's are really 'webapp components' and more than a schema, and I 
>think the title would be better suited.
>
>So I'm all happy with this idea... I know that I'd derive a class from 
>Schema called XMLSchema, and then modify schema list to accept a path name 
>as well as a classname, and if it's a pathname, then I know to instantiate 
>an XMLSchema instead... you get the idea.
>
>But then it occurred to me... why don't we merge all these configuration 
>files for components into single per-component xml files?  So instead of 
>the above idea we had something like:
>
><expresso-component>
>         <objects>
>                 [Put same definitions above here]
>         </objects>
>         <control>
>                 [Put the equiv of the struts-config file here]
>         </control>
>         <logging>
>                 [Put the contents of your ****Logging.xml files here]
>         </logging>
></expresso-component>
>
>Here's why I'm thinking this:
>
>-With that we could get rid of the configuration directory all 
>together.  Each configuration file would be neatly bundled with the 
>expresso add-on component.
>
>This further simplifies dealing with app servers that don't allow real 
>paths within the webApp anyway.  All configuration data would be neatly 
>stored in the jar files.
>
>Anyway, as I said, I'm looking for something backwards compatible for now, 
>but I really want to come up with a better plan to be able to add 
>components to an Expresso Framework in a 'neater' way than we currently 
>are doing.
>
>Any thoughts?  Any other suggestions to make a better way of using web 
>components without requiring separate webapps?
>
>Thanks!
>                                                 -Mike
>
>_______________________________________________
>Opensource mailing list
>Opensource at jcorporate.com
>http://mail.jcorporate.com/mailman/listinfo/opensource
>Archives: http://mail.jcorporate.com/pipermail/opensource/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.jcorporate.com/pipermail/opensource/attachments/20020623/a9fe39de/attachment-0002.htm