jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Guggisberg <stefan.guggisb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jr3] One Project
Date Wed, 01 Dec 2010 13:04:26 GMT
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
<bdelacretaz@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Stefan Guggisberg
> <stefan.guggisberg@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
>> <bdelacretaz@apache.org> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Thomas Mueller <mueller@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> ....I think reducing the number of
>>>> ...If we include all dependencies (such as Apache Commons jar files) you
>>>> would need a special class loader, right? Otherwise there may be conflicts
>>>> with if somebody already uses a different version of a Apache Commons
>>>> library that Jackrabbit also uses. That would be quite complex I guess, so
>>>> I wouldn't do that. Instead, I would just concentrate on having as few jar
>>>> files as possible...
>>> OSGi solves that problem nicely,
>> so you can have multiple versions of the same jar/bundle concurrently
>> deployed in the same osgi container?
> Yes, either by embedding problematic jars in others and hiding them as
> private packages, or by setting the right version numbers in the OSGi
> manifests, so that bundles get wired to the right libraries.
> That's in theory, you know how practice goes ;-)

i take that as "in practice, OSGi *doesn't* solves that problem nicely" ;-)


> Anyway, right now my ideal view as a Jackrabbit user would be to get
> OSGi-friendly jars of the various Jackrabbit modules (core, indexing,
> webdav etc.) to be able to assemble them in my OSGi container, and
> replace the ones that I'd like to replace with my own variants.
> Whether the Jackrabbit runnable jar uses OSGi is up to the Jackrabbit
> developers, but from the user's point of view I think that's important
> - two major users of Jackrabbit are Day/Adobe and Sakai, which both
> run on  OSGi, and with the current jars replacing/extending some
> things is a bit painful.
> -Bertrand

View raw message