karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Achim Nierbeck <bcanh...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] <config/> & <configfile/> in feature (KARAF-4829)
Date Thu, 08 Dec 2016 14:24:47 GMT
In that case I'd say postpone to 4.1 ...

regards, Achim


2016-12-08 15:23 GMT+01:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net>:

> Hi Achim,
>
> You are right for "other" files than pure cfg files (we are using this in
> decanter for elasticsearch YML and cellar for hazelcast XML).
>
> In that case, it means that we have to check the format in KARAF-4829 (it
> could be a little more complex than just reading the properties from the
> file URL ;)).
>
> For 2, my intention is to keep <configfile/> anyway, but does it make
> sense to create ConfigAdmin cofniguration from <configfile/> on Karaf 4.0.x
> (or postpone to 4.1.x).
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 12/08/2016 03:16 PM, Achim Nierbeck wrote:
>
>> Hi JB,
>>
>> 1. No, as <configfile> can also be used for all kind of other
>> configurational files, especially useful for the jetty.xml which isn't
>> part
>> of the configuration used by ConfigAdmin.
>> 2. No, again Pax-Web needs configfile to work as it is right now ...
>>
>> regards, Achim
>>
>>
>> 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
>



-- 

Apache Member
Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer &
Project Lead
blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>

Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master

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