aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alasdair Nottingham <>
Subject [DISCUSSION] The nature of uber bundles.
Date Mon, 06 Dec 2010 10:57:09 GMT

While I was working on making the proxy code common between blueprint
and JNDI I noticed that many of our components have a *-bundle module,
to build an "uber" bundle, but we seem to have slightly different ways
of building these bundles. We seem to build uber bundles in one of
three ways:

1. The uber bundle contains all the other modules in the same top level module
2. The uber bundle pulls in some subset of other top level models
(e.g. proxy and blueprint pull in the util bundle)
3. The uber bundle pulls in all mandatory dependencies (e.g. blueprint
pulls in asm).

I think it would make sense to have a common approach and as a result
I would like to propose the following:

1. The uber bundle. This bundle collects all the relevant child
modules of the module. An uber bundle does not collect other modules
like proxy or util. Such a bundle is not standalone. So a blueprint
uber bundle would collect blueprint-api, blueprint-core, blueprint-cm,
but not util or proxy. A proxy uber bundle collects proxy-api,
2. The nodeps bundle. This is a truely standalone bundle that includes
everything it needs. It is standalone. So the blueprint nodeps bundle
would pull in the util, proxy modules and asm.

I think this balances the desire for ease of deployment with the
desire for better sharing and modularity and minimum duplication of

What do people think?

Alasdair Nottingham

View raw message