karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Achim Nierbeck <bcanh...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: Telling whether startup is really complete
Date Fri, 10 Aug 2012 08:55:34 GMT
So why don't you use paxexam-karaf then, no need to use shell scripts ....

2012/8/10 Christian Schneider <chris@die-schneider.net>:
> The scripting is mainly important for testing. You start a fresh camel,
> install stuff in it, do some tests and shut it down again.
> Perhaps the testing framework is good enough for that case. Still for some
> reason our test guys like to use an out of the box camel or Talend ESB and
> do their tests with this.
> Of course as they mainly use Talend ESB it should be easy to have it on in
> this case. So this is not a big reason to have it on by default in pure
> Karaf.
> To sum it up I would like to have the delay as a default as I think it helps
> beginners but from the Talend point of view having the option in the distro
> is good enough. So I will go with the majority.
> Christian
> Am 10.08.2012 09:55, schrieb Achim Nierbeck:
>> +1 on Ioannis,
>> and tbh I don't see how a hit enter does improve here,
>> last time I used it I had to hit 4 times on enter to get a shell, so
>> there was in no means
>> any better usage then before.
>> Concerning using command-scripts I still don't see the issue with that,
>> Karaf is a Server it's not supposed to be rebooted every 5 minutes it's
>> build
>> to last for ever, or memory does us part. Just like any other container.
>> And from my experience with Operations I can guarantee you they are far
>> more
>> into the "where do I monitor your app?" question then "is it already
>> up and running?"
>> For operations it's far more vital to tell that the application isn't
>> running anymore cause they
>> have to guarantee certain SLAs and this is best monitored with nexus /
>> JMX at this point.
>> They don't necessarily rely on a shell, and don't care about the first
>> 5 minutes a process takes to
>> get up and running.
>> For developers I'd say it still sufficient to use "la" and if it isn't
>> available I'd say "damn you are fast" :)
>> regards, Achim
>> 2012/8/10 Ioannis Canellos <iocanel@gmail.com>:
>>> Christian, nobody said that waiting is bad, on the contrary it is really
>>> nice. Personally I find it a great idea.
>>> The point of argument is if it is going to be the default behavior or
>>> not.
>>> The problem that you describe about the new user is well known and all of
>>> us have been asked questions by users that fall into that problem.
>>> The question is, should this user problem impose a default startup delay
>>> to
>>> all users?
>>> --
>>> *Ioannis Canellos*
>>> *
>>> FuseSource <http://fusesource.com>
>>> **
>>> Blog: http://iocanel.blogspot.com
>>> **
>>> Twitter: iocanel
>>> *
> --
> Christian Schneider
> http://www.liquid-reality.de
> Open Source Architect
> Talend Application Integration Division http://www.talend.com


Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/>
Committer & Project Lead
OPS4J Pax for Vaadin
<http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & Project
blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>

View raw message