geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
Subject Re: cxf bundles
Date Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:38:37 GMT
On Thu January 14 2010 3:25:23 am David Jencks wrote:
> On Jan 13, 2010, at 11:44 PM, David Jencks wrote:
> > 1. is there a need for the 2 tools jars to be in the same bundle as
> > the minimal bundle?  Maybe we could use minimal + the other two jars
> > individually bundleized.
> > 2. do the other jars in the minimal bundle provide generally useful
> > functionality?
> > 3. how much is exposed unnecessarily if the individual jars were
> > bundleized?
> 
> this would be "nothing" if we had a core bundle with everything else
> fragment bundles.

When we started doing OSGi related stuff in CXF, we DIDN'T go down the route 
of bundles fragments because, at the time, Felix didn't support them at all 
and the support in Equinox was only partially there.   Basically, not 
something we could rely on.   Since we already had the big bundle jar (users 
wanted that), we just added the OSGi stuff to there.    

I would LOVE some help doing the fragment thing if that is now working in the 
various OSGi containers.   

Dan



> 
> thanks
> david jencks
> 
> > 4. Have we approached cxf about creating the appropriate bundles
> > there?  Its pretty unlikely we will be ready to release g 3 before
> > they do another release.
> >
> > thanks
> > david jenkcs
> >
> > On Jan 13, 2010, at 7:30 PM, Rex Wang wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> I am looking into "GERONIMO-5016 Enable cxf in Geronimo 3.0". There
> >> is an issue I think need discuss first before I drive further. Not
> >> like axis, the cxf community did not release their jars as a
> >> bundle. Instead they made 2 separate distributions named "cxf-
> >> bundle" and "cxf-bundle-minimal" to contain the different set of
> >> their components. For instance:
> >> The cxf-bundle-minimal bundle contains 17 components:
> >> cxf-common-utilities
> >> cxf-common-schemas
> >> cxf-api
> >> cxf-rt-core
> >> cxf-rt-transports-http
> >> cxf-rt-transports-http-jetty
> >> cxf-rt-transports-jms
> >> cxf-rt-bindings-soap
> >> cxf-rt-databinding-aegis
> >> cxf-rt-databinding-jaxb
> >> cxf-rt-frontend-jaxws
> >> cxf-rt-frontend-simple
> >> cxf-rt-databinding-xmlbeans
> >> cxf-rt-ws-security
> >> cxf-rt-ws-policy
> >> cxf-rt-ws-addr
> >> cxf-rt-ws-rm
> >> but what we need are just following 13:
> >> cxf-api
> >> cxf-common-utilities
> >> cxf-rt-core
> >> cxf-rt-bindings-xml
> >> cxf-rt-bindings-soap
> >> cxf-rt-databinding-jaxb
> >> cxf-rt-frontend-jaxws
> >> cxf-rt-frontend-simple
> >> cxf-rt-transports-http
> >> cxf-rt-ws-addr
> >> cxf-rt-ws-security
> >> cxf-tools-common
> >> cxf-tools-java2ws
> >> You can see the "cxf-tools-common" & "cxf-tools-java2ws" are not
> >> included by "cxf-bundle-minimal".
> >> The "cxf-bundle" contains all the 13 components we need, but it
> >> will import a great many other components, which will not only
> >> bring a lot of jobs to exclude un-necessary jars when build our cxf
> >> plugins, but also increase the size of new G3.0.
> >>
> >> So I see 2 ways to pull cxf bundles in:
> >> 1. Use the cxf-bundle-minimal and make a new private bundle that
> >> contains "cxf-tools-common" & "cxf-tools-java2ws" in Geronimo.
> >> 2. Make a private cxf bundle customized by ourselves which only
> >> contains the above 13 packages
> >>
> >> I suggest the approach #2. Any comments?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> 

-- 
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://www.dankulp.com/blog

Mime
View raw message