aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alasdair Nottingham <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION] The nature of uber bundles.
Date Mon, 06 Dec 2010 11:05:45 GMT
I really want a number 1. I pull all of the aries modules into my
product and currently I get multiple copies of util, and I have
multiple versions of ASM.

I know I could go with the individual bundles too, but this has it's
own negatives, such as having a huge number of extra bundles.

I understand the need for #2, but I strongly believe we should have a
#1 and certainly when we first discussed uber bundles I was expecting
more of a #1 than a #2.

Alasdair

On 6 December 2010 11:00, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not really sure about #1.  My main use case is more for #2 where
> i'd want a standalone and highly cohesive bundle.
> In all cases, i agree we should rationalize what we currently have.
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:57, Alasdair Nottingham <not@apache.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> 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,
>> proxy-impl.
>> 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
>> code.
>>
>> What do people think?
>> Thanks
>> Alasdair
>>
>> --
>> Alasdair Nottingham
>> not@apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>



-- 
Alasdair Nottingham
not@apache.org

Mime
View raw message