karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Baptiste Onofré ...@nanthrax.net>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Remove features lifecycle in K4
Date Mon, 13 Apr 2015 16:22:20 GMT
Maybe we can introduce a --force option to stop whatever the 
bundle/feature is used by another feature ?

Regards
JB

On 04/13/2015 06:12 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> We also have to take care about the started="false" flag somehow.
> I suppose if a feature flags the bundle as started="false", it would behave
> as if this feature was stopped for the computation of that bundle state.
>
> I'm fine with this behaviour, we just to understand that there's no way to
> make sure a bundle is stopped.
>
>
> 2015-04-13 18:04 GMT+02:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net>:
>
>> I'm with you on that: we just have to agree on the behaviour and document
>> it accordingly.
>>
>> In my opinion, if a bundle is used by a feature (feature A), it should not
>> be stopped if we stop another feature that uses it (feature B).
>>
>> It's the same for the transitive features.
>> If a feature is used by a feature, it should not be stopped if we stop
>> another feature that used it ;)
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>>
>> On 04/13/2015 06:01 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, I was thinking about it.
>>> Though the obvious other solution is to fix it.
>>>
>>> I have actually started an email this morning to discuss but I haven't
>>> finished it.
>>>
>>> Overall, I think it may not be very difficult to fix, as the bundle state
>>> changes are already handled correctly afaik.  The real problem is to agree
>>> on the semantics on the effects, so that we can compute the desired state
>>> of each bundle correctly.
>>>
>>> Problems arise when a bundle is used by several features, one of which
>>> being started and the other resolved.
>>>
>>> Anyway, it's really up to you, I don't mind fixing the code as long as we
>>> agree on the behaviour.
>>>
>>> 2015-04-13 17:51 GMT+02:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net>:
>>>
>>>   Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I discussed with Christian about KARAF-3102.
>>>>
>>>> The feature lifecycle doesn't actually fully work, especially around the
>>>> stop action.
>>>>
>>>> In order to avoid to perturb the users, I think we should remove the
>>>> features lifecycle commands. Else, if they are provided, users will try
>>>> it
>>>> and may be disappointed as they won't work as expected.
>>>>
>>>> WDYT ?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> JB
>>>> --
>>>> 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
View raw message