felix-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matias SM <matias...@yahoo.com.ar>
Subject Re: OBR RepositoryAdmin content in embeded framework
Date Wed, 30 May 2012 00:46:31 GMT


On 29/05/12 20:42, Richard S. Hall wrote:
> On 5/29/12 18:31 , Matias SM wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 29/05/12 13:58, Richard S. Hall wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5/29/12 12:49 , matias san martin wrote:
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>> De: Richard S. Hall<heavy@ungoverned.org>
>>>>> Para: users@felix.apache.org
>>>>> Enviado: martes, 29 de mayo de 2012 0:02
>>>>> Asunto: Re: OBR RepositoryAdmin content in embeded framework
>>>>>
>>>>> On 5/28/12 21:03 , Matias SM wrote:
>>>>>> Hi again Richard,
>>>>>> I've been investigating further and I realized my confusion came

>>>>>> because it seems that, while OBR takes into account the installed

>>>>>> "by hand" bundles to resolve as requested, it doesn't respond 
>>>>>> about those resources (associated to the bundles installed "by 
>>>>>> hand").
>>>>>> That is, if I try to "resolve()" a bundle by using the 
>>>>>> RepositoryAdmin, it knows about the installed by hand bundles. 
>>>>>> But, if I try to "getResources()" or "discoverResources(..)", I 
>>>>>> get no results.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there a way of getting the installed "by hand" resources from

>>>>>> the RepositoryAdmin without creating a repository?
>>>>> Off the top of my head, I don't know. I would assume that the 
>>>>> RepositoryAdmin is only querying actual repositories for 
>>>>> discoverResources() et al, so you won't get back resources from 
>>>>> the "fake" local repository.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not sure what is the correct thing here, but I'm inclined to think 
>>>>> the current behavior makes sense, since technically installed 
>>>>> bundles do *not* form a repository (e.g., it is not possible to 
>>>>> download them).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for the clarifications Richard, I understand your
>>>> point and I agree with you. However, I may be wrong but, bundles (I
>>>> think) are always installed from a source, so it may be possible to 
>>>> use
>>>> that as the URI of the resource.
>>>
>>> Yes, they are always installed from a source, but that information 
>>> isn't saved when installing via OBR, nor can the bundle include its 
>>> source in its manifest, since it may come from a number of sources.
>>>
>> I understand. Also, I think it would be a nice improvement to have 
>> some logic capable of fetching this information (maybe intercepting 
>> the installation command or something) and creating a full fledged 
>> repository with it.
>
> Yes, the would be the approach. The current OBR impl is too simplistic 
> to do that, but a beefed up implementation could do something like that.
>
>>
>>>> Related to this, now that you mention it, I think that when creating a
>>>> repository from bundles (by using the API), the resulting xml doesn't
>>>> have a an URI attribute for the resources. Wouldn't that be wrong,
>>>> taking into account that the resources should be downloable?
>>>
>>> Not sure. I've only created repositories using bindex and via the 
>>> maven-bundle-plugin and both give a URI attribute.
>>>
>>
>> The case I mention could be reproduced by creating resources from 
>> bundles (DataModelHelper#createResource(Bundle)) and then a 
>> repository from those resources 
>> (DataModelHelper#repository(Resource[])). I think it is related to 
>> what you said about OBR being unable to get an URI from the Bundle.
>
> Yes, I'd imagine if it is starting from a Bundle, then there isn't 
> much it can do about creating a URI.
>
>> Should I create a JIRA issue to check this case?
>
> I guess the important question is, what would you like to have it do? 
> There are valid use cases for modeling bundles as resources in a 
> repository as OBR does for deploying against installed bundles, so we 
> can't disallow it.
>
> Do you have some other suggestion?

Maybe throwing an exception when calling writeRepository(..) with 
resources that doesn't have URI (i.e. avoid invalid persistent 
repositories, but allow an abstraction similar like that for in-memory use).
I know this is not a great solution but at least would avoid 
(misleading) successful creation of "invalid" repositories.
Kind regards

>
> -> richard
>
>>
>> Kind regards and thank you for your comments
>>
>>> -> richard
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ->  richard
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you in advance for your help
>>>>>> Kind regards
>>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org


Mime
View raw message