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] Best way to provide a migration to the new 1.3.0 features schema for downstream projects
Date Fri, 12 Jun 2015 09:55:20 GMT
Before starting the instance: you first populate the system.properties, 
and after you start the instance.

It's what I did in Cellar itest for instance.

Regards
JB

On 06/11/2015 05:28 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> It looks good to me !
>
> Thanks,
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 06/11/2015 05:26 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>> 2015-06-11 17:21 GMT+02:00 Jamie G. <jamie.goodyear@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Long as the patched Karaf can handle the older specs too then all is
>>> good
>>> :)
>>>
>>
>> Definitely !
>>
>> What I've done, is very simple.  It's just about removing the unsupported
>> xml elements when parsing the xml for a 1.3.0 schema, so that jaxb won't
>> complain about them.  It seems attributes that have no matching field is
>> not a problem...
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Once the new spec is in place I'll talk to the SDN community about the
>>> changes and help them migrate as well.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jamie
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>> So I started experimenting a bit, and the second solution seems to be
>>> very
>>>> easy to implement.
>>>> I've been able to deploy an upgraded pax-web 4.2.3-SNAPSHOT with
>>>> specific
>>>> Karaf 4 features and install pax-http without any problems (but the
>>> change
>>>> of a few imports in karaf to support pax-web 4.x).
>>>> So unless there are objections, I'll go ahead and add degraded support
>>> for
>>>> Karaf 4 features to Karaf 2.4 and 3.0 branches.
>>>> Once those are released, we should be able to migrate downstream
>>>> projects
>>>> to leverage the new Karaf 4 features where it makes sense.
>>>>
>>>> 2015-06-11 9:47 GMT+02:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net>:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>
>>>>> I would do for the second one, I think it's easier and make sense for
>>>>> backward compatibility.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> JB
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 06/11/2015 08:51 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I want to work on a nice way to migrate to the new 1.3.0 schema for
>>>>>> features for downstream projects (pax-web, cxf, activemq, etc…).
>>>>>> I have two possible ways in mind which I'd like to discuss.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The first one would be to write an additional mojo for the maven
>>>>>> plugin
>>>>>> which would translate the new 1.3.0 schema to older schemas, deleting
>>>>>> unsupported stuff.  The mojo would thus generate an additional schema
>>> with
>>>>>> a different classifier, either for the old schema, or for the new
>>>>>> one.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Another way would be to add this translation tool inside a bug-fix
>>> release
>>>>>> of older branches, so that the old feature service could support
the
>>> 1.3.0
>>>>>> syntax.  The drawback is that this would not work on already existing
>>>>>> releases obviously.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or we could do both.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fwiw, I haven't experimented yet on the translation, so for complex
>>>>>> features definition using the new schema, I'm not sure yet if the
>>>>>> translation will lead to usable results.  As a last resort, if
>>>>>> it's not
>>>>>> usable, the downstream projects can manually provide the two
>>> repositories.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> 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