karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ehsan Zaery Moghaddam <zaerymoghad...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Which config.properties and startup.properties with admin:create ?
Date Fri, 01 Nov 2013 11:42:36 GMT
Hi

I'm agree with branding too. It's more meaningful to have such options
there.

​Regards
Ehsan​


On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Achim Nierbeck <bcanhome@googlemail.com>wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> Branding sounds like a good idea.
> I think it would solve all the issues we have with custom and std. Karaf.
>
> regards, Achim
>
> sent from mobile device
> Am 01.11.2013 08:10 schrieb "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <jb@nanthrax.net>:
>
> > Agree Gert.
> >
> > Why not using a kind of "branding" bundle that admin:create can use (it's
> > a step forward to the profile):
> > - if the custom distribution (ServiceMix) doesn't provide a "branding"
> > bundle, admin:create creates a fresh Karaf instance (as it does now)
> > - if the custom distribution provides a "branding" bundle, admin:create
> > can look for this "branding" bundle and use it to create the "fresh
> custom"
> > instance
> >
> > WDYT ?
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On 10/31/2013 11:08 PM, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> >
> >> L.S.,
> >>
> >>
> >> In the case of ServiceMix, I would like the admin:create to create a
> >> fresh, empty ServiceMix instance instead of a fresh, empty Karaf
> >> instance.  Adding an option to the command does not really fix the
> >> issue in my mind, as the user still has to be aware of the fact that
> >> ServiceMix has a modified startup.properties file to know he/she has
> >> to add the option.
> >>
> >> Personally, I would prefer to keep things as simple as possible until
> >> we work out the profiles solution and just add a flag to indicate that
> >> we want the startup/config properties file from the actual root
> >> container instead of the ones from Karaf (something like
> >> inheritStartupProperties=true and inheritConfigProperties=true).  For
> >> Karaf, we can just leave out the config file and default to false to
> >> keep things as before.
> >>
> >> I agree this will break current behavior for users of ServiceMix that
> >> have been modifying their own startup/config.properties files, but
> >> those are pretty knowledgeable users anyway so we could just add that
> >> to the release notes or something.  The current behavior of
> >> admin:create just doesn't work at all for anyone in the case of
> >> ServiceMix (or any other project out there that requires modifications
> >> to either of those two files) - they end up with a container they have
> >> to manually go and edit before they can start it.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Gert Vanthienen
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 9:55 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Gert,
> >>>
> >>> the only thing is that admin:create won't create a "fresh empty" Karaf
> >>> instance: if the user changed the startup.properties, admin:create will
> >>> create an instance already with these changes included. Currently,
> >>> admin:create creates a complete fresh instance, ignoring the changes
> from
> >>> the user in the root instance.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> JB
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 10/31/2013 09:20 PM, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Jean-Baptiste, Ehsan,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> How about making that configurable instead of using the -c parameter?
> >>>> We could still leave the default to pick the original, embedded Karaf
> >>>> config/startup.properties, so for Karaf nothing would change.
> >>>>
> >>>> But at least that way, projects like ServiceMix could just have the
> >>>> admin:create command do the right thing for that particular project
by
> >>>> simply adding the org.apache.karaf.admin.core.**cfg file to their etc
> >>>> directory, without the user having to be aware of the little bit of
> >>>> extra tweaking required to properly bootstrap the container?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> Gert
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 7:41 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> jb@nanthrax.net>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Good idea. I will do that.
> >>>>> The thing
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards
> >>>>> JB
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 10/31/2013 01:28 PM, zaerymoghaddam wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi guys
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Isn't it possible having an option on admin:create to decide
whether
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>> create a new plain instance or use root instance configurations?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> For example: 'admin:create -c'.
> >>>>>> which '-c' could mean clone root instance's configuration.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>> Ehsan
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -----
> >>>>>> E.Z.Moghaddam
> >>>>>> zaerymoghaddam@gmail.com
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> View this message in context:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.**com/Which-config-properties-**
> >>>>>> and-startup-properties-with-**admin-create-**tp4030050p4030137.html<
> http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/Which-config-properties-and-startup-properties-with-admin-create-tp4030050p4030137.html
> >
> >>>>>> Sent from the Karaf - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >>>>> jbonofre@apache.org
> >>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> >>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >>> jbonofre@apache.org
> >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >>>
> >>
> > --
> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > jbonofre@apache.org
> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message