Mailing-List: contact dev-help@felix.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@felix.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of adreghiciu@gmail.com designates
 209.85.218.205 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        b=EgOKA5LfHNAJyKHf7nZ20HnO38B8UcCGXMeK5FnRyEtN/yfdV3+ao1ryQJsj4UuMxM
         gfst4PhXMh3JytvUMM7UVloVsA9sWbSC6D3bFTqpgUx1nQdQP8FMI6xH+4b7Vndp8tOK
         Wlb6SxUdh9cOaA0K5+SMeaWXIAVJChrFIVRJs=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <fd848f8b0910060120v118e4987k2d5560808effb37f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <fd848f8b0910060120v118e4987k2d5560808effb37f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:27:44 +0300
Message-ID: <87eb8aee0910060227h2291be46id6220ccb49a39d83@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Karaf features + Sigil launch
From: Alin Dreghiciu <adreghiciu@gmail.com>
To: dev@felix.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00032555b50ab81c1f047540d752

--00032555b50ab81c1f047540d752
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I do not want to compare the two formats so here fact about the "profile"
format: * profile format is the format that can be scanned by a composite
scanner (scan-composite:). Here is some more documentation:
http://paxrunner.ops4j.org/display/paxrunner/Composite+provisioning
* it can include any other provisioning specs so you can scan from karaf
features, simple text files containing bundles urls, maven poms, directories
containing bundles, zips containing jars, any bundle referenced by url.
* it can include references to another composite scanners.
* there are a bunch of such files in Pax Runner repository:
http://paxrunner.ops4j.org/space/Pax+Runner+profiles+list (
https://scm.ops4j.org/repos/ops4j/projects/pax/runner-repository/org/ops4j/pax/runner/profiles/
)
* the whole functionality about using this scanners is extracted out of pax
runner into pax scanner project

Now related to the part where you launch an osgi framework you may want to
take a look at pax runner eclipse plugin that allows you to start any OSS
framework / any version and we can discuss about any features you may need.

About install/update/uninstall bundles in the external running framework you
may want to look at Pax Exam RBC (remote bundle context) that we use it to
allow the install/uninstall of bundles from outside of the process (RMI) +
allows to make calls to services in the remote process. Again, if any
special needs, let me know.

About ivy is just a matter (I think) of implementing an url handler as we
did for maven. Actually we have an issue there to support it but yet there
was not requested.

HTH

On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 11:20 AM, David Savage <david.savage@paremus.com>wrote:

> Hi there,
>
> I'm currently looking into how to set up a launch configuration for
> Sigil development in the IDE and one idea that seems quite attractive
> is to reuse the Karaf features format to list the bundles that the
> user wishes to install in the framework. The use case I'm looking to
> solve is initial boot of an OSGi framework from the IDE with a pre
> configured set of bundles. Once the framework is running it will be
> possible to install and uninstall individual bundles via the IDE to
> allow for update of classes during debug. But this initial step allows
> us to boot a framework into a known state.
>
> Some areas that I'm a little hazy about...
>
> * Editor support for features files - is there any available plugins
> for Eclipse in this area?
> * Extensions to the karaf format to support sigil projects (ivy
> dependencies?)
> * Support for Karaf features from a remote process - how tied is the
> org/apache/felix/karaf/features/*.java code to a local framework? I
> think it makes sense drive this from an external process vs installing
> Karaf in the framework as this would allow us to debug Karaf. This
> would involve having a Karaf driver in the IDE that understands the
> Karaf features file format and uses it to make install and start
> commands into the external framework process.
>
> The other idea that sprang to mind was the pax runner profile format.
> Can anyone comment on the relative pros and cons of each format?
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave
>


-- 
Alin Dreghiciu
Software Developer
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
Software.
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java - Domain Driven Development.

--00032555b50ab81c1f047540d752--