karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guillaume Nodet <gno...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] <config/> & <configfile/> in feature (KARAF-4829)
Date Thu, 08 Dec 2016 14:35:01 GMT
Instead of trying to guess the format of the config file, we could simpy
use the extension I think.
The <configfile> element has both the file name and the url.  So if the
file name ends with ".cfg", we assume we can write the content to
configadmin directly.  I'm not sure I see a real problem here.

2016-12-08 15:28 GMT+01:00 Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@apache.org>:

>
>
> 2016-12-08 15:27 GMT+01:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net>:
>
>> Yes, Achim already replied and I fully agree.
>>
>> So, I wonder if it makes sense to do ConfigAdmin configuration creation
>> for <configfile/> as it would require to detect file format.
>>
>> Can we document that way:
>> 1. for cfg file, we recommend to use <config/> in feature XML
>> 2. for any other file format, we recommend to use <configfile/> in
>> feature XML
>> ?
>>
>
> That sounds to me the exact reason why we create those two elements in the
> first place. ;-)
>
>
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>>
>> On 12/08/2016 03:24 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>
>>> The <configfile> element supports  any kind of configuration file, not
>>> only
>>> properties file.  For example we use it for the xml configuration of
>>> jetty
>>> in pax-web.
>>>
>>> 2016-12-08 15:08 GMT+01:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net>:
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>>
>>>> Some weeks ago we discussed on the mailing list about the fact that a
>>>> feature using <configfile/> just creates the cfg file in the etc folder,
>>>> and the corresponding configuration is created later by ConfigAdmin
>>>> (thanks
>>>> to FileInstall).
>>>> This can produce unfortunate behavior as the bundles in the feature can
>>>> be
>>>> started before the creation of the configuration in ConfigAdmin.
>>>> Christian proposes to create the configuration in ConfigAdmin as soon as
>>>> the FeatureService deals with <configfile/> tag.
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand, in Karaf 4.0.5, we improved the <config/> tag: the
>>>> FeatureService now creates the corresponding cfg file in etc based on
>>>> the
>>>> <config/> tag content.
>>>>
>>>> So, with KARAF-4829, we will have the same behavior using <config/>
and
>>>> <configfile/>:
>>>> * <config/> will create the configuration in ConfigAdmin and the cfg
>>>> file
>>>> * <configfile/> will create the cfg file and the configuration in
>>>> ConfigAdmin
>>>>
>>>> The difference is where the configuration comes from:
>>>> - an existing file (mvn URL) in the case of <configfile/>
>>>> - inner properties in the case of <config/>
>>>>
>>>> I wonder:
>>>> 1. does it make sense to have both <config/> and <configfile/>
in the
>>>> future (Karaf 4.1.x) ?
>>>> 2. should we do the change on <configfile/> in Karaf 4.0.x ?
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts ?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> JB
>>>> --
>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbonofre@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Red Hat, Open Source Integration
>
> Email: gnodet@redhat.com
> Web: http://fusesource.com
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>
>


-- 
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Red Hat, Open Source Integration

Email: gnodet@redhat.com
Web: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message