karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Baptiste Onofré ...@nanthrax.net>
Subject Re: Minimal karaf distro
Date Fri, 17 Jan 2014 12:34:47 GMT
You mean footprint in terms of what ? memory or filesystem ?
Actually both, but mostly filesystem, not that much in terms of memory. 
Regarding the issue in blueprint (some are related to the 
implementation, not the blueprint spec itself), I'm afraid we will have 
similar issues in DS ;)


On 01/17/2014 12:13 PM, Christian Schneider wrote:
> That is correct. Using blueprint does not block the user from using
> other frameworks but blueprint has a quite big foot print. It has
> several jars itself and also needs aries proxy. Besides that we had a
> lot of blueprint or proxy related issues recently. So I really see a
> benefit of changing to DS. ... I only hope DS does not have similar
> issues :-)
> Christian
> On 17.01.2014 11:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>> Hi Ioannis,
>> Good point, but, for instance, if Karaf requires Aries Blueprint (only
>> for the namespace handler), it doesn't mean that we can't use another
>> Blueprint implementation (like Gemini). Pushing namespace handlers out
>> of the topic, it's already possible to use Gemini instead of Aries.
>> So, even if Karaf use Blueprint internally, it doesn't mean that you
>> can't use (from an user perspective) another implementations or
>> framework.
>> Regards
>> JB

Jean-Baptiste Onofré
Talend - http://www.talend.com

View raw message