aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Bosschaert <david.bosscha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Aries JNDI dependencies
Date Mon, 16 Jan 2012 09:57:16 GMT
Hi Tim,

I think we need to find the balance between 'super modular' and 'user
friendly'. To me, the jndi-uber bundle seems like the right level of
modularity for many cases. It provides the JNDI functionality in a
single bundle with a number of dependencies.

I can understand the need for aries-util and aries-proxy (the
OSGi/JNDI spec specifies that references need to be proxied). On the
aries-blueprint dependency, my suggestion is to make it optional so
that the aries jndi-bundle (the uber bundle) can resolve without
aries-blueprint being there. It should function as long as you don't
use the blueprint-specific features...

Cheers,

David

On 16 January 2012 09:36, Timothy Ward <timothyjward@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> There seems to be a misunderstanding here. The JNDI core bundle does not depend on the
proxy or blueprint APIs.
>
> The bundle David is talking about is the JNDI uber bundle, which by definition depends
on everything because it *is* everything. The proxy API is used by the JNDI URL bundle to
implement the osgi:service URL scheme. This spec requires damping, which is exactly the sort
of thing that the proxy bundle is for. The blueprint API is used to implement the blueprint:
URL scheme, which is designed to integrate with blueprint, and so absolutely needs the blueprint
API.
>
> I would like to ask people not to be so hasty in assuming that dependencies are unnecessary.
If you want minimal dependencies then you should be consuming the individual bundles and looking
at what they pull in.
>
> In this case we could look at avoiding slf4j, although it seems to be popular and other
Aries bundles use it. I would be a -1 for removing util, proxy or blueprint dependencies from
the JNDI project. The first two because they are a good reuse of existing function, the last
because it's part of a really useful feature. If you want to run in an environment that doesn't
provide those packages then you can always cut back to the JNDI API and core bundles.
>
> Regards
>
> Tim Ward
> -------------------
> Apache Aries PMC member & Enterprise OSGi advocate
> Enterprise OSGi in Action (http://www.manning.com/cummins)
> -------------------
>
>
>> Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 10:08:18 +0100
>> Subject: Re: Aries JNDI dependencies
>> From: gnodet@gmail.com
>> To: dev@aries.apache.org
>>
>> Well, the point is that it removes a dependency as it's always
>> provided by the JRE.
>> I'm far from being a fan of JUL myself, the only way I'm using it is
>> when redirecting everything to a nicer backend in pax-logging ;-)
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:05, Felix Meschberger <fmeschbe@adobe.com> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Am 16.01.2012 um 10:01 schrieb Guillaume Nodet:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 09:57, Felix Meschberger <fmeschbe@adobe.com>
wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> * The SLF4J dependency always drags in at least 2 slf4j bundles.
Would
>> >>>> it not be better to have the logging go through the OSGi log service?
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Or java.util.logging if the capabiilities of the log service are seen
>> >> too limited.
>> >
>> > Oh, please, not ;-)
>> >
>> > Then rather stick with SLF4J. Thanks.
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > Felix
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ------------------------
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>> ------------------------
>> FuseSource, Integration everywhere
>> http://fusesource.com
>

Mime
View raw message