Re: [gemini-dev] Gemini Naming review docuware

[Bob Nettleton <BOB.NETTLETON@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Mike,

I took a quick look through the slides, and have includes some small comments below.  

Since it has been a while since I've made any changes to Gemini Naming, please feel free to disregard my comments if recent changes to the code have made my comments obsolete.  :)  

Thanks,
Bob


Here are my comments:

1.Slide 4 - The phrase "A JNDI provider that exports JNDI entries as OSGi services and OSGi services as JNDI entries" is only half-true.  JNDI bindings (which I'm interpreting to mean the same as "JNDI entries") are not exported as OSGi services.  OSGi services are available as JNDI entries, however, as part of the effort to have a migration path for Java EE developers that are moving to an OSGi-based approach.  While it's certainly possible that a given JNDI provider that integrates with Gemini Naming could wrap generic JNDI bindings with service interfaces, the framework itself does not implement this, nor is this mentioned in the JNDI Service standard.  


2. Slide 10 - "Includes custom JNDI provider".  I'm not sure if this is true.  I believe we do implement a custom object factory for "osgi"-based URLs, so this could be considered a custom JNDI provider.  If that was the intent, then leaving this is fine.  




> -----Original Message-----
> From: michael keith
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 12:05 PM
> To: Gemini Dev List
> Subject: [gemini-dev] Gemini Naming review docuware
> 
> Attached is a draft of the docuware for the Naming review. Please make
> a
> pass through it and offer suggestions.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Mike