karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Charles Moulliard <cmoulli...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Several proposals
Date Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:08:20 GMT
+1 for point 1. This is mandatory and also an incredible feature which
is not well documented and not know by a lot of user <config/> and
<configfile/> except  from us and karaf features file for http/war
+1 for point 2 but be carefull as suggested Ioannis
+1 for point 3. That will question users about what is kar, what can
we do with KAR, what is the added value of KAR instead of packaging
everything in a ZIP ;-)

On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have some proposals to submit to your approval:
> 1. Feature <config/> tag should be able to create the corresponding etc file
> (KARAF-970). If the <configfile/> tag create the cfg file in the etc folder
> (it's the purpose of this tag ;)), the <config/> tag create the properties
> only the properties in the ConfigAdmin memory, it doesn't flush into the
> Karaf cfg file. This behavior could be defined by a property in the
> etc/org.apache.karaf.features.cfg file.
> 2. Refactoring of the Maven modules on trunk (KARAF-963). For instance, the
> config shell commands are in shell/config module, and the config MBean is in
> the management/mbeans/config module. More over, we are going to add new OSGi
> services (for config, for wrapper, for kar, etc, etc). I propose to
> refactore the Maven modules to use a structure similar to admin or features
> modules. For instance, it means that we will have a config module containing
> a core module (containing the core implementation and the OSGi services), a
> command module (containing the shell commands), a management module
> (containing the MBeans).
> 3. Include the kar feature by default. To "promote" the usage of the KAR
> artifacts, I think it could be interesting to provide the KAR support by
> default in Karaf (as a bootFeatures). The KAR deployer is light and doesn't
> cause overhead.
> WDYT ?
> Regards
> JB
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbonofre@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com

View raw message