ace-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Toni Menzel <t...@okidokiteam.com>
Subject Re: Migration to Pax Runner...
Date Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:18:27 GMT
Glad you asked, Angelo and I had further discussions on gchat and agreed on
a way to go.
Here's the current status (lengthy version;)
----
PART 1: General things
First of all, what makes ace assemblies so different from other Pax Runner
setups:
a. Artifacts are flat file artifacts up until now (See
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACE-18 for some thoughts on this)
b. Artifacts are highly configured through config files who must be at a
certain place on startup

We can (and should) overcome [a] easily. (see ideas on using Pax Runner
Profiles in part 3)
[b] means:
we cannot just provide a single Pax Runner config file. We need to copy
those configuration files to a certain position.

PART 2: Result of discussion so far
We need a number of pre-defined targets: a default target, a default server,
a server-obr combo, etc.

For each of these, we would like a 'release' version containing a framework
of our choice (latests felix), and does not require anything else at
runtime.

The 'dev' version is based on pax runner, can be configured to use any
framework you like, and contains possibly some additional bundles (e.g. for
logging)
So, that would lead to something like six target xml's, resulting in twelve
directories in the deploy/target directory.

Each of those targets will be produced by Pax Runner.
Release targets will have no pax runner reference and will be static to
known (recommended?) target configuration set.
Benefit of using Pax Runner even in that scenario instead of the current way
is (amonngst others): simple to switch to a different frameework and
version, same "language" used to define the assembly as in dev- versions
(who will be just a pax runner config file).

PART 3: Ideas on using profiles
One other thing i see  as well:
Pax Rummer has the notion of profiles / composites.
So, if we decide to publish ace artifacts to a snapshot repository (maven)
somewhere, we can add ace profiles for each target here:
https://scm.ops4j.org/repos/ops4j/projects/pax/runner-repository/.

This would make starting with ace very simple:
./pax-run.sh --profiles=org.apache.ace.gateway
and in exam:
profile("org.apache.ace.gateway")

anyhow, this depends on how simple we can integrate the bridge to maven (ant
will keep being the buildsystem for ace as far as i know).
See http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACE-18

----

I will provide a new patch for ACE-32 to meet the criterias in PART 2.

Anyone additional thoughts ??

Cheers,
Toni


On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Marcel Offermans <
marcel.offermans@luminis.nl> wrote:

> Toni, Angelo,
>
> I was wondering what the current status is of migrating all targets to Pax
> Runner? There has been a lot of discussion in
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACE-32 about this. Is there anything
> I can do to help?
>
> Greetings, Marcel
>
>


-- 
Toni Menzel
Independent Software Developer
Professional Profile: http://okidokiteam.com
toni@okidokiteam.com
http://www.ops4j.org     - New Energy for OSS Communities - Open
Participation Software.

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