Re: Confluence for SoC

From: Marcel (emmpeege..mail.com)
Date: Mon Jun 05 2006 - 02:24:46 EDT

  • Next message: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Confluence for SoC"

    Nothing on the Atlassian forums in response to my question. Which way
    has the hammer fallen on this? The last reply seems to be tending
    towards a framework for displaying objects visually - I am happy with
    either.

    Andrus Adamchik wrote:
    >
    > On Jun 2, 2006, at 11:12 AM, Marcel wrote:
    >
    >> Your original criticism still remains unresolved: I don't see why
    >> would a developer ever bother deploying a web service in these
    >> circumstances. The only distinctly ROP element here is the XMPP
    >> notification, and that is only relevant where the tool is going to be
    >> employed multi-user, and the same mechanism could be achieved in
    >> other ways. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea, but as you asked
    >> above: what makes it cayenne-rop rather than cayenne?
    >
    > Because this is not intended for the developers - this is a framework
    > for end users. Essentially we'll be building an example that somebody
    > can take and convert into a business-specific application with the
    > object graph that makes sense in a specific domain. See my comment
    > below on general 2-tier vs. 3-tier considerations.
    >
    >
    >> Here's the picture I've been left with of where ROP would actually be
    >> employed in the Real World (TM). A servlet-powered web application
    >> needs a more powerful tool for some aspects of its operation - most
    >> likely administration or visualisation (say via Web Start). If you
    >> aren't dealing with a web application in the first place, there is no
    >> reason to use cayenne-rop over cayenne.
    >
    > Not true - cayenne-rop can coexist in an otherwise web app
    > environment, but other web applications presence is not relevant at
    > all. (e.g. imagine a multiplayer Java game written in Swing - central
    > server can be based on rop, and there are no web applications
    > involved). I think of it as "webapp plus" and a competitor to Ajax.
    >
    > On the other hand the aspects that make ROP choice win over two tier
    > (client-to-db) approach are:
    >
    > * Security. I wouldn't claim that the webservice is inherently more
    > secure than a DB, but ROP moves security controls to the server
    > application tier, allowing things like single sign-on, custom access
    > control logic, etc.
    >
    > * Placing business logic in a server application tier. E.g. you can
    > transform the objects on the server, or offload some expensive
    > processing from the client. Like you mentioned XMPP integration gives
    > collaboration capabilities (and presence information).
    >
    > In other words ideally you'd have the combined benefits of both worlds
    > - webapps and rich desktop apps - something Ajax is trying to achieve,
    > only with real desktop UI.
    >
    > Soon I am going offline till late Saturday. Let's see if there is an
    > easy fix to the Confluence update problem, and postpone a decision
    > until then. I am actually in favor of the graph browser, as IMO it
    > better demonstrates what ROP is, but I am also concerned about timing
    > and the learning curve.
    >
    > Andrus
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Jun 05 2006 - 02:25:29 EDT