karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Baptiste Onofré ...@nanthrax.net>
Subject Re: [karaf boot] Added a DS sample with Servlet and JPA and slightly different setup
Date Thu, 17 Dec 2015 10:46:19 GMT

Yes, I agree about the PoC approach, but I think PoC can become a 
project or as least some module can use the "easy" karaf-boot way.

My only concern about copy/paste is that the project bootstrapping is 
long: personally, using archetype or copy paste from a sample pom is 
fine but long, actually longer than just describing couple of 
dependencies and plugin. But it could make sense.

For multi-module, I agree, but I don't see any show stopper: each module 
can use karaf-boot and work together (see the samples of service 
provider and consumer, karaf-boot should really encourage to leverage 
the service approach).


On 12/17/2015 11:20 AM, Christian Schneider wrote:
> For me the main purpose of karaf boot in unchanged form is to allow
> people to easily create small proof of concepts.
> In this stage it normally is no issue that you do not use the company
> parent pom. You can start easily with karaf boot and bring your poc to a
> level where management decides to use karaf.
> Then at some point you need to transition to a regular project. So you
> can copy the karaf boot parent, edit it to include your company parent
> and other changes you might need and use it for your project(s).
> This transition phase will also happen when you use the blackbox
> karaf-boot plugin but then it will be a lot harder to adapt it to your
> needs.
> Another thing we need to look at is the transition from a single module
> project to a multi module project. I think it is really great to let
> people start with a single module/project but to leverage OSGi people
> will want to build multi module projects at some point. This will either
> happen during the transition from poc to a regular project or even
> earlier. So I think we also need to make sure that multi module projects
> can be built easily. For this case I think
> it is natural that the set of modules that form you application will
> have their own parent pom (that of course might depend on a company
> parent).
> Christian
> On 17.12.2015 10:51, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>> Hi Serge,
>> It's what I meant by "intrusive": sometime we have to use a company
>> wide parent pom, no choice. So we can't force the usage of a
>> karaf-boot parent IMHO.
>> That's why, after the earlier discussions on the mailing list, I did:
>> - a set of karaf-boot-starter, providing dependencies depending what
>> you need (rest, jpa, shell, etc). They act as BoM and users just have
>> to define in the dependencies set (see the karaf-boot-samples).
>> - as a BoM doesn't bring plugin (only dependencies), and to simplify
>> the build/bootstrapping at maximum, I created the
>> karaf-boot-maven-plugin. This plugin is responsible of scanning the
>> starters, scanning the sources, and depending of those, build and
>> possibly bootstrap the project by wrapping other plugins.
>> So, we are really in a kind of black box, where processes are hidden:
>> and it's one of karaf-boot main purpose. However, I got Christian's
>> point: he's more in the way to not hide as he expects later people
>> won't use karaf-boot to a more advanced/expert way. So, at that time,
>> people can "duplicate" what we have in a parent-pom.
>> That's why maybe we can provide both:
>> - I honestly think that "hide way" will match in 80% of the cases,
>> where people wants to focus on business code and don't care about the
>> plumbing. It's the feedback that I got discussing with different
>> people like Serge, and others (from different background, business,
>> company).
>> - However, at least by documentation or parent pom, we have to provide
>> a way to karaf-boot users to use a very advanced/expert way. I like
>> Christian's idea to use an extender, it makes sense in some use case.
>> The profile or feature generation by annotation or starter scanning is
>> also interesting IMHO.
>> My $0.02 ;)
>> Regards
>> JB

Jean-Baptiste Onofré
Talend - http://www.talend.com

View raw message