cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Bosschaert <david.bosscha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Thoughts about DOSGI 1.3.2 release
Date Tue, 29 May 2012 07:12:53 GMT
Migrating to blueprint will also solve
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DOSGI-69 which is a
long-standing issue that many people want to see resolved.

David

On 28 May 2012 18:51, Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin@gmail.com> wrote:
> FYI:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DOSGI-115
>
> The proposed fix will probably work with Gemini straight away :-)
>
> Sergey
>
>
> On 28/05/12 18:45, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>>
>> On 28/05/12 18:35, David Bosschaert wrote:
>>>
>>> I can understand that it's a significant refactoring.
>>>
>>> If you stay within the pure Blueprint model (within the spec) you
>>> shouldn't get bound to Aries. Eclipse Gemini also has an
>>> implementation.
>>
>>
>> Sure and there was a proposal on how to get Gemini used under the hood,
>> but the issue is how to get both used as needed.
>>
>> Having DOSGi migrated to Blueprint and CXF 2.6.x would obviously improve
>> DOSGi CXF a lot, specifically, its OSGI-'awareness' would increase a lot.
>>
>> But as I said, there are still quite a few issues in this list:
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&mode=hide&jqlQuery=project+%3D+DOSGI+AND+resolution+%3D+Unresolved+ORDER+BY+updated+DESC
>>
>>
>> which IMHO are quite important to get fixed for the users be able to do
>> their POCs, before making a big 'leap' forward.
>>
>> Unfortunately I can not afford spending several weeks on migrating the
>> code to Blueprint, testing with Aries & Gemini, etc...Perhaps we will
>> get a bit of help from DOSGI CXF users :-)
>>
>> Cheers, Sergey
>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>> On 28 May 2012 18:17, Sergey Beryozkin<sberyozkin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi David
>>>>
>>>> On 28/05/12 18:09, David Bosschaert wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sounds good, Sergey. I'm all for releasing frequently.
>>>>>
>>>>> One of the things that I think would be good to tackle is to migrate
>>>>> to OSGi Blueprint (from of the current Spring-based approach). Is that
>>>>> something that you were thinking of looking at?
>>>>>
>>>> Not really. Some users would like to use Blueprint but not be bound to
>>>> Aries. So for me it's a DOSGI 1.4 level issue which will require a
>>>> significant time investment.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers, Sergey
>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> David
>>>>>
>>>>> On 28 May 2012 17:34, Sergey Beryozkin<sberyozkin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm thinking of starting working toward releasing DOSGI 1.3.2.
>>>>>> I think I'll spend the next 2 or months on fixing few issues I can
>>>>>> find
>>>>>> some
>>>>>> time for, given that there's a lot of other CXF/etc work that needs
>>>>>> to be
>>>>>> taken care of.
>>>>>> I'd like to suggest that the next release will be 1.3.2 as opposed
to
>>>>>> 1.4.0.
>>>>>> Moving to CXF 2.6.1 at the DOSGI level will be a pretty major effort,
>>>>>> giving
>>>>>> that a minimal bundle in CXF 2.6.x has gone.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems that there are still quite a few issues there that are
>>>>>> important
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> be fixed for the base/simple DOSGI applications to work reliably
and
>>>>>> given
>>>>>> that 2.5.x branch is still relatively 'young', I'd probably prefer
to
>>>>>> stay
>>>>>> on 2.5.x (2.5.4 for DOSGI 1.3.2 and might be CXF 2.5.5/2.5.6 for
DOSGI
>>>>>> 1.3.3), simply to make the most of the limited time that I will be
>>>>>> able
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> spend on DOSGi, before making a major switch to CXF 2.6.x - and
>>>>>> hoping by
>>>>>> that time many of the 'basic' DOSGI features have been fixed...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks, Sergey
>>>>>>
>>>>
>
>
> --
> Sergey Beryozkin
>
> Talend Community Coders
> http://coders.talend.com/
>
> Blog: http://sberyozkin.blogspot.com

Mime
View raw message