[Opensource] 4.2 Discussion - Configuration Files

[larry hamel]

a unified config file seems like a good idea to me.

consider DOM-style handling (reading in entire doc, then doing actions) instead of SAX style (reacting to elements as they are read).
 
larry

At 08:41 PM 6/23/2002, Brent McGaugh wrote:

>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/