karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Baptiste Onofré ...@nanthrax.net>
Subject Re: Move bundle from framework feature (startup.properties) to a separate feature
Date Mon, 26 Mar 2012 09:43:15 GMT
I would rename/refactore the standard feature which currently gather:

         <details>Standard providing core Karaf features</details>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.features/org.apache.karaf.features.command/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.features/org.apache.karaf.features.management/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.instance/org.apache.karaf.instance.core/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.shell/org.apache.karaf.shell.console/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.jaas/org.apache.karaf.jaas.modules/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.jaas/org.apache.karaf.jaas.config/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.instance/org.apache.karaf.instance.command/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.features/org.apache.karaf.features.core/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.instance/org.apache.karaf.instance.management/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.diagnostic/org.apache.karaf.diagnostic.core/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.diagnostic/org.apache.karaf.diagnostic.common/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.diagnostic/org.apache.karaf.diagnostic.command/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.diagnostic/org.apache.karaf.diagnostic.management/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.shell/org.apache.karaf.shell.log/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.management.mbeans/org.apache.karaf.management.mbeans.log/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.shell/org.apache.karaf.shell.dev/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.management.mbeans/org.apache.karaf.management.mbeans.dev/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>
         <bundle 
start-level="30">mvn:org.apache.karaf.jaas/org.apache.karaf.jaas.command/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</bundle>

WDYT ?

Regards
JB

On 03/26/2012 11:37 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> It sounds good to me.
>
> We can have:
> - startup feature used only to create the startup.properties
> - framework feature gathering "core" component like commands, etc
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 03/24/2012 08:44 PM, Christian Schneider wrote:
>> While it is no big issue for you to create a custom distribution I am
>> quite sure that for 99% of users it is and they will not even try.
>>
>> So my argument is that people rather will start with one of the default
>> karaf distros. As on the other hand users will quite for sure need more
>> bundles than those in the distro - at the very least their own bundles.
>> So they have two options. They can either deploy to the deploy folder or
>> they use maven.
>>
>> For those users that use maven the network distro is ideal. They will
>> load bundles from their maven repo anyway so why not load as many as
>> possible and make the distro as small as possible. As the bundles will
>> be cached anyway the performance effect is only relevant on first
>> install. So the network distro is an ideal way for maven users to use
>> karaf imho. Especially I think it is ideal for all developers as they
>> will have either a maven repo or internet access quite for sure.
>>
>> For distribution creation the network distro may also be intersting. We
>> could provide commands to build a distro:
>> Like distro:create which creates a distro that contains all bundles from
>> all active feature urls and all current config. So the developer could
>> work with the network distro to have a small install and create a custom
>> distro whenever needed.
>>
>> Christian
>>
>>
>> Am 24.03.2012 19:19, schrieb Jean-Baptiste Onofré:
>>> Around the same topic, from a general perspective, I don't think it's
>>> a good idea to provide too thin distribution.
>>>
>>> I mean that Karaf is a container, and as a container, it provides
>>> standard features, and the end-user accepts that (as an end-user
>>> accepts to use JEE application server even if he doesn't use all
>>> features provided by the app server).
>>>
>>> The key point is to give the ability to the end user to create a
>>> custom container starting from a standard distribution. That's why:
>>> - I'm always agree to provide simple and useful way to create custom
>>> distribution (Maven plugins, etc), etc.
>>> - I'm most of the time against to provide new distributions. We should
>>> have ONE standard distribution. The minimal (or framework) is
>>> interesting to create custom distribution (so used with
>>> karaf-maven-plugin) but it doesn't make sense on its own (nobody will
>>> start a "production" container with minimal, an user will always
>>> create its own distribution on top of minimal).
>>>
>>> If the user wants really "home made" container, he can start from the
>>> framework and create its own, specific need oriented.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 03/24/2012 10:58 AM, Christian Schneider wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> the framework feature is used to create the startup.properties. If I
>>>> understood this correctly then
>>>> these bundles are loaded in a special way (not with pax-url). To be
>>>> able
>>>> to create a smaller minimal distro (or an even small "network" distro)
>>>> I think it makes sense to have as few bundles in there as possible.
>>>>
>>>> So what has to be in there as a bare minimum. I think we need at least
>>>> the feature-core and pax-url with their dependencies.
>>>> Ist that correct? If we makes these independent of blueprint then I
>>>> think we can even skip the whole aries bundles.
>>>>
>>>> So I propose to create a new feature like karaf-core or similar
>>>> where we
>>>> move all features that should always be started but that do not have to
>>>> be in the startup.properties.
>>>> Does that make sense? If yes I will create a jira and move as many
>>>> bundles as possible.
>>>>
>>>> So what is the benefit of moving these? If I think of the "network"
>>>> assembly then we can create a karaf distro that only contains the libs
>>>> of the startup.properties in the system
>>>> dir. The rest can be loaded using pax url. So I am quite sure we can
>>>> achieve to have a distro that is smaller than 2-3 MB.
>>>>
>>>> Christian
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

-- 
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Mime
View raw message