karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Towards Karaf 3.0.0
Date Tue, 12 Jul 2011 05:26:58 GMT
Hey Charles,

+1, although this will delay Karaf for at least another 2-3 months at
least I'm afraid.

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 7:05 AM, Charles Moulliard <cmoulliard@gmail.com> wrote:
> That means that we must in this release :
> - Simplify the deployment process of the different archives (EAR, WAR,
> EBA, JAR, KAR, Spring, Blueprint) and help our end users for doing
> that through Maven, OBR, ... - Question : Do we have to support all of
> them ? Maybe we could restrict the deployment of the required type
> (JAR, Bundle, Spring, Blueprint, WAR ?) and let's project like
> Geronimo to take care about EAR, EJB modules ?

I don't think that Karaf should be responsible for all types. The base
types are quite enough. Aries, Geronimo, SMX could provide more
specific deployers for different packages (and we almost have those
deployers already). I consider it much more important that .kar files
could adapt Karaf in an easier way here.

> - Provide a more Enterprise Web Console for operating Karaf -
> configuring DataSource(s), web modules, Security, ...

Again I'm not sure how far this is the responsibility of Karaf.
Although Karaf has the enterprise features file I'm not sure if this
is something we really want in the core. We should rather discuss if
we shouldn't provide a karaf-enterprise subproject or something
similar containing those features (if we want to host this at Karaf at
all) (Feel free to create an issue for this point; I'm sure there is
none by now).

> - Add admin profile to restrict usage of the Karaf commands as we only
> support right now a full admin access

Interesting idea. This could definitely add some value (I think we're
also lacking an issue for that).

> - Improve and refactor commands like also the display- e.g. when we
> display all commands --> should be grouped and separate from each
> other, shortcut displayed at the end, ...

Same as above.

> - Provide the strategy to be used to perform unit test/integration
> with Karaf using pax-exam, pax-exam-2, .... or any other solution
> allowing to mock OSGI platform

TBH I don't think that this is part of Karaf. We should rather
integrate a Karaf Profile for pax-exam2 here (therefore this does not
have to come necessarily with Karaf 3. We can tackle this later or
earlier as we have time).

> - Provide repository of enterprise features (Hibernate, EJB, ...) or
> at least governance rules to allow third party projects to develop
> such features and pass them into a acceptance program to certified
> them according to Karaf releases.

Devinitely; this would match the Karaf Enterprise Repository issue, wouldn't it?

Kind regards,

> + 1 for JB propositions + mine improvements of components
> + 1 for a Karaf 3.0 release proposing more enterprise features
> - for RC
> Regards,
> Charles Moulliard
> Apache Committer
> Blog : http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com
> Twitter : http://twitter.com/cmoulliard
> Linkedin : http://www.linkedin.com/in/charlesmoulliard
> Skype: cmoulliard
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 12:05 AM, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 11, 2011, at 5:26 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
>> <big snip>
>>> * Karaf profiles & Kar files (IMHO this is one of the most important
>>> features for 3.x and not present in the issues by now; there had been
>>> considerable work on this by David, but still, we're missing a
>>> possibility to start e.g. CXF without modifying some files in etc)
>> I'm really hoping that 3.0.0 will have the minimal and standard assemblies created
using kars/features rather than the old style maven-assembly-plugin.  I haven't been able
to work on this for a while but i thought I left it in a state as least as functional as the
old-style servers.  The only bit I recall as missing is the legal files.
>> What are you looking for to start e.g. cxf?  IIRC you can assemble a server including
a cxf feature as a boot feature, or add it in later as a regular feature....
>> thanks
>> david jencks

View raw message