felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Savage <dave.sav...@paremus.com>
Subject Re: Sigil launcher
Date Thu, 20 Aug 2009 19:17:53 GMT
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Richard S. Hall<heavy@ungoverned.org> wrote:
> On 8/20/09 14:38, David Savage wrote:
>> Just wondering what others think of this idea? Wonder if it's
>> something that could/should be merged with general felix launcher?
> Let me see if I understand. Essentially, the launcher opens up a socket to
> which is listen to commands and then performs the corresponding action on
> the instance of the framework it created. Is that correct?


> Sounds interesting, but I am not sure if it necessarily needs to be in
> default launcher. It seems like it could easily be accomplished as a wrapper
> to the default launcher. Even though you mention wanting to avoid starting
> bundles, this could obviously just be a separate bundle you install when you
> want to accomplish such tasks.

Sure like the felix launcher with the bundles dir which is like a
simple version of fileinstall - this is a lowest common denominator
type approach for remote control of an OSGi runtime. As you say I
/could/ use the directory based bundle launch mechanism to start the
server as a bundle - but what if that's the behaviour we wanted to
debug via the ide - separating it out stuck me as cleaner as long as
it remains light weight. From the IDE perspective I want to be able to
bring the OSGi runtime up with as few dependencies as possible - as
then what ever you debug is out of band of the IDE interaction. Maybe
this is it's only use...

> I am not completely against putting it in the default launcher if other
> people thought it was very worthwhile to have this capability built in.
> However, if that is what we decide, then it should definitely be kept as
> small as possible and disabled by default.

Sure off by default make sense from many angles - not least of which
security. Agree see no reason to rush it into framework but I thought
I'd flag it as existing in any case :)



> -> richard

View raw message