felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alin Dreghiciu <adreghi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: New feature in FileInstall
Date Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:39:05 GMT
Well, we are talking about pretty much a small change as it only adds the
code to read the content of the link file and instead of a file input stream
it uses url.openStream. So, it does not introduce any new dependency and the
changes are relative small in
size. I can out up a patch quickly. It may look like a lot of changes
but is just moving code around.

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 4:39 PM, Richard S. Hall <heavy@ungoverned.org>wrote:

> On 6/24/09 8:52 AM, Filippo Diotalevi wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Alin Dreghiciu<adreghiciu@gmail.com>
>>  wrote:
>>> Hi guys,
>>> Yesterday I got the question if Pax URLs are supported by FileInstall. Of
>>> course there are not as you must have the bundle in the scanned
>>> directory.
>>> But, In my view with quite a simple change this can be done. And is about
>>> making FileInstall support any url, so including pax urls.
>>> The idea is that file install to support beside jar, .cfg files also .lnk
>>> files. What is a link file? A simple text file that contains the url of
>>> the
>>> actual bundle to be installed.
>>> So, if file install finds such a file, it reads the content and installs
>>> the
>>> bundle mentioned in the file via url. If .lnk file changes the old
>>> content
>>> (bundle) is uninstalled and the new one is installed.
>>> To me looks like a powerful option. A more "advanced" usage would be that
>>> teh .lnk file to be a properties file with properties as "url" and
>>> "start"
>>> and "startlevel".
>> Hi Alin,
>>   as discussed at [1], I think that there is definitely interest for
>> extending FI to support other artifacts besides jar and cfg files.
>> On the other side, I'm also of the opinion that FI should be usable
>> with the minimum felix configuration (felix+shell+fileinstall), with
>> no additional dependencies.
>> I think the technical solution to make everybody happy should be the
>> same adopted by the Apache Karaf Deployer ([2]): keep the fileinstall
>> lightweight, supporting only jar and cfg, and use the whiteboard
>> pattern to allow the definition of additional "deployers".
>> Doing this way, FI would remain clean and lightweight, and you will be
>> able to install new bundles adding additional support for other
>> artifacts (.lnk, .war, karaf features and so on)
>> WDYT?
> I agree.
> -> richard
>> [1]
>> http://www.nabble.com/-DISCUSS--Align-Karaf-deployer-and-felix-fileinstall-td24030876.html#a24032869
>> [2]
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf/deployer/filemonitor/src/main/java/org/apache/felix/karaf/deployer/filemonitor/DeploymentListener.java

Alin Dreghiciu
Software Developer - Looking for new projects!
My profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/alindreghiciu
My blog: http://adreghiciu.blogspot.com
http://www.ops4j.org - New Energy for OSS Communities - Open Participation
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java - Domain Driven Development.

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