Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [corona-dev] use case

Bryan,
 
Based upon one of your previous postings, I do believe you do have a clue what Corona does.  Its goal is to deliver a collaboration framework (1) based upon an Eclipse server-side environment (2).
 
Corona's collaboration framework does utilise ECF for its communications.  However, we use it for the communciation layer.  The ECF examples of chat, file sharing, etc... are not integrated with Corona's collaboration framework.  They are seperate plugin examples of how an application provider could leverage ECF's communication framework.
 
I understood your use case to focused on how to share the gig (or two) of data using "Share...".  Corona is focused on providing a common context for collaboration.  In the scenario you descibed, this would be supported if the developers involved need to share the same context.  The functionality you are asking for would be to utizie Corona's collaboration framework in order to participate in the same collaboration context.
 

________________________________

From: corona-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Bryan Hunt
Sent: Thu 3/15/2007 3:58 PM
To: Corona development
Subject: Re: [corona-dev] use case


Interesting ... I will do that.  I guess this also means that I have no clue as to what corona does as I thought it was collaboration atop remote services.  I guess I'll wait for a new write-up on corona and re-evaluate then. 

Thanks.

Bryan

On Mar 15, 2007, at 2:29 PM, O'Flynn, Dennis wrote:


	Bryan,

	 

	The "Share..." functionality mentioned in this use case is provided by ECF (not Corona).  You probably should post this use case to their dev list as well so that the ECF community can respond.

	 

	-----Original Message-----
	From: corona-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:corona-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bryan Hunt
	Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 10:45 AM
	To: Corona development
	Subject: [corona-dev] use case

	 

	Here's a collaboration use case for consideration.  If we could solve  

	this problem, it could greatly increase the productivity of our  

	customers.

	 

	A user checks out one or more Eclipse projects from subversion or  

	perhaps creates new project(s).  The user makes modifications to the  

	contents of the project(s).  The user runs an external program that  

	uses the Eclipse projects as input, and produces artifacts in a  

	specified location that is not an Eclipse project.  The status of the  

	process execution is displayed in an eclipse view (along with the  

	status of previous executions).  The process fails to produce the  

	expected results.  The user determines that the root cause is in one  

	of the Eclipse projects and that data is owned by another developer.   

	The user selects the process status in the eclipse view, right-clicks  

	and selects "Share...".  The user then selects the developer who  

	needs to debug the root cause.

	 

	The target developer receives a notification that there is a problem  

	that needs to be debugged.  The developer accepts the problem and the  

	status of the failing process is loaded into their Eclipse view as if  

	they had originally run the process.  They re-run the process, debug  

	the fail, and fix the bad inputs in the Eclipse project(s).  They  

	right-click the status of the, now passing, process and select  

	"Fixed".  The fixed inputs are sent back to the originator.

	 

	Some interesting problems with this use case:  If the originating  

	developer is using a local sandbox for his workspace, how does the  

	receiving developer get the contents.  If the receiving developer is  

	in the middle of modifying those same Eclipse projects, do they have  

	to switch worspaces?  The incoming projects can't overwrite their  

	current modifications.  What if the originating developer needs to  

	modify those projects while waiting for the receiving developer to  

	fix the problem?  The original data must be preserved so the  

	receiving developer can reproduce the fail.  If the originating  

	developer re-runs the process, the new artifacts must be placed in a  

	different output directory to preserve the original, failing,  

	artifacts.  Consideration must be given to the amount of data  

	shared / moved - it's not uncommon for us to have a gig or two of  

	input / output data surrounding a process.  Support for a shared  

	filesystem such as AFS may be necessary as part of a solution to  

	these problems.

	 

	Bryan

	 

	PS ... It seems that I will be best served to understand the basics  

	of OSGi, followed by ECF to use as a foundation for our remote  

	services use case, and then work on understanding the corona context  

	container?? to serve this new use case.  Suggestions?

	 

	_______________________________________________

	corona-dev mailing list

	corona-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx

	https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/corona-dev

	 


	The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. 
	_______________________________________________
	corona-dev mailing list
	corona-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
	https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/corona-dev


The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. 

<<winmail.dat>>


Back to the top