karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Milen Dyankov <milendyan...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: bnd files in Decanter Project
Date Thu, 11 Feb 2016 22:19:04 GMT
Guys,

Allow me to provide my 2 cents in this discussion.

One - I think we have more than enough arogancie and blame games in the
OSGi community. We really don't need more of those. It would be nice if
everyone could remain calm and watch their language even if they have a
point as far as the facts are concern. Let's not assume bad intentions just
because of frustration with something. People make mistakes and wrong
decisions. And we are all people! Luckily it's only software in this case,
no one gets hurt (physically) and things are easy to fix. Let us be nice to
each other. Please!

Two - for me personally it doesn't make huge difference if the information
is in the POM or in the bnd file. You, the guys working on the project the
most, should decide on that. However here are few things to consider:
 - It is true that using bnd files reduces the size of the POMs which is
particularly important if you have complex multi-module projects
 - Both maven plugins available up to date are using bnd (not to be
confused with bnd-tools) under the hood and bnd.bnd files are the default
way to provide instructions to bnd. Personally I don't understand why
someone decided to have this in POM in first place while creating the
maven-bundle-plugin.
 - The new bnd-maven-plugin (which I see people using more and more often)
requires you to have all the instructions in bnd.bnd file. Moreover it is
able to process bnd.bnd from parent projects which allows you to completely
skip those in child projects if you don't need to.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting yet another approach. Just pointing
out there are options out there that could be discussed in civilized and
polite way!

Best,
Milen





On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 9:43 PM, Achim Nierbeck <bcanhome@googlemail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Christian,
>
> I don't think you seem to follow an evil plot, it's just you don't seem to
> think ahead and take yourself to important.
> This discussion about bnd.file or not bnd.file should have been done before
> you provided evidence.
> A discussion on IRC is as you should be aware of not a valid discussion. So
> if it didn't happen on the mailinglist, it didn't happen.
>
> At this point I don't get why you now try to turn your "jumping the gun"
> into me being at fault.
>
> The only change I'm arguing about is the extra bnd.file all other build
> improvements are regular changes, which I'm not arguing about.
> Again for me an extra configuration file isn't of any value compared to the
> configuration contained in the pom.
>
> So this isn't about me insisting you to change everything back, the issue
> here is that you impose what you think is best on everybody else.
>
> Achim
>
>
>
> 2016-02-11 20:19 GMT+01:00 Christian Schneider <chris@die-schneider.net>:
>
> > Hi Achim,
> >
> > thanks for your detailed description. I can assure you that I do not
> > follow any evil plot like you seem to think. I will for sure not use
> gradle
> > any time soon. I am quite happy with maven and am just trying to make our
> > project better and the code more efficient. I also was not really sneaky
> by
> > creating an issue up front and describing what I want to do. I just did
> not
> > to also spawn a discussion on the list to make this more obvious. Please
> be
> > assured that the only reason for this was my inherent impatience and good
> > faith that JB would not have supported my change if he thought it would
> be
> > a bad thing for the karaf community. So I was not really aware of doing
> > something wrong at this time.
> >
> > Please also take into account that your build problem only happened on a
> > new module you wanted to add and could be fixed by just adding the empty
> > bnd.bnd file. So I think a -1 while possible was not really necessary. I
> > think the better option would have been to bring the issue on the list
> and
> > try to reach a consensus. I think in my whole apache history I never did
> a
> > -1 on a commit.
> >
> > Do you insist on me taking back the commit now or would it be ok to first
> > try to reach a consensus or if not possible do a vote? I will happily
> undo
> > my commit if the outcome is to not do the change. On the other hand if we
> > agree to do the change it would save me to shuffle the code back and
> forth.
> >
> > If you insist on this I will undo the changes now. It is probably not
> > possible to just undo the commit as there are quite a few commits in
> > between. So it will be quite some manual work for me.
> > I also hope that if you insist on me taking back the change now you are
> ok
> > if I only undo the bnd file part of the commit and leave other changes
> like
> > moving some common deps into the parent in place.
> >
> > Christian
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11.02.2016 17:06, Achim Nierbeck wrote:
> >
> >> Hi there,
> >>
> >> I'll stick to my
> >>
> >> -1
> >>
> >> Now the reasons for this:
> >>
> >> Even though the opposite has been proclaimed on the list, it did break
> the
> >> build for me. As without a bnd file the project isn't building
> >> successfully, even though the information needed has been provided by
> the
> >> pom.
> >>
> >> Second the usage of an extra bnd file is error prone, and I don't care
> >> about removed lines of code, this is just not a justification.
> >> Another thing why I opposed to extra bnd files. Only on Eclipse when
> using
> >> the bnd-tools project you have an extra editor available to use it. And
> >> this only works for people using both, eclipse and the bnd-tools. All
> >> others using a different tool chain are losing the benefit to see
> >> everthing
> >> in one go.
> >> So basically people using IntelliJ or Netbeans (both tools to be know to
> >> work far better with maven, then eclipse) are out of this. And I rather
> >> don't rely on a proprietary tooling for this.
> >>
> >> So what's next after this? Just sneak the bnd-tools plugins into this
> >> project for "supposedly" better support with eclipse and bnd-tools?
> >> I don't think so. Our basis is still Maven and not Gradle, and this is
> >> because we have a big user-base that feels very comfortable with it.
> >> Using the declarations in the pom has been working nicely and if nothing
> >> needs to be done one just needs to add those 4 lines for the usage of
> the
> >> maven-bundle-plugin. No extra file needed, everything is in one place
> and
> >> is in line with all other Karaf projects.
> >> Actually this is one of the reasons I removed those bnd files from the
> >> pax-web project long time ago, because all those project related
> >> information are in one place now, instead of scattered around the
> project.
> >>
> >> Third, and this does outweigh everything else. Christian tried to
> provide
> >> evidence with this move and now argues this way everything is better for
> >> us.
> >> At this point I can't accept this. I don't think this is the way our
> >> community works and surely this isn't the way we work together on our
> >> sources. At least
> >> this has been my understanding of a successful project.
> >> If I'm wrong on this and everybody can do as he likes, I guess I need
> >> think
> >> about the consequences.
> >>
> >> regards, Achim
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2016-02-11 15:12 GMT+01:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net>:
> >>
> >> I see valid arguments here, and I keep my +1.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> JB
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 02/11/2016 02:40 PM, Christian Schneider wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I also did a jira issue that explains the change.
> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-4300
> >>>>
> >>>> To show the advantage let me compare one of the old configs to the new
> >>>> one:
> >>>> http://apaste.info/gC5
> >>>>
> >>>> This shows that 18 lines of xml are replaced by 2 lines in the bnd
> file.
> >>>> The syntax is basically the same
> >>>> as in xml just without the brackets. The big advantage is that we can
> >>>> leave out the boilerplate xml that maven
> >>>> needs to redefine a plugin.
> >>>>
> >>>> So I think the change to bnd files makes a lot of sense. I also did
> this
> >>>> change in Aries a long time ago.
> >>>> Btw. I also added API baselining in this change which helps us when
do
> >>>> changes on the API.
> >>>>
> >>>> Christian
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 11.02.2016 14:21, Christian Schneider wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> As further reference. This is the commit where I did the change:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://github.com/apache/karaf-decanter/commit/dabeeecd41f46a0c5344580f65c2ea6877fd6d35
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As you can see I added 108 lines and removed 753.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That means the usage of bnd files saves us about 640 lines of xml.
I
> >>>>> think this is a strong indicator that it is a good idea to do so.
Of
> >>>>> course it might cause problems that I overlooked.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Christian
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 11.02.2016 13:57, Christian Schneider wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Achim,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> it is difficult to predict what changes warrant a discussion.
I
> agree
> >>>>>> with you that I should have discussed this on the list. I talked
to
> >>>>>> JB and he was positive so I did not expect any problems. Apparently
> I
> >>>>>> was wrong :-(
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The usage of bnd files for configuration of the imports and
exports
> >>>>>> is a very concise replacement for the same configs in xml.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The big advantage is that you can omit the maven-bundle-plugin
in
> the
> >>>>>> pom of each module. So basically you replace about 10-15 lines
of
> xml
> >>>>>> with 0-5 lines in the bnd file.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This does not break any functionality for users. For developers
it
> >>>>>> just requires to put an empty bnd.bnd file into each module
if it
> >>>>>> does not need special configs. Unfortunately it is not possible
to
> >>>>>> define that it uses a bnd file if it is there  and is also happy
if
> >>>>>> no such file is there. I plan to suggest this to the felix project
> as
> >>>>>> it would make this even easier to use.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In what way do you see this as a breaking change? I made sure
that
> >>>>>> all code still works and that all tests still pass. I also did
> manual
> >>>>>> tests of all the modules.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So the only thing you need to do for a new module is to add
this
> >>>>>> empty bnd.bnd file and you are fine. If you do not want to use
the
> >>>>>> bnd file to configure your OSGi configs you can use the xml
like
> >>>>>> before.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So apart from my bad communication where I fully agree with
you.. do
> >>>>>> you really  think this warrants a -1?
> >>>>>> Do you have any technical concerns?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Christian
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2016-02-11 9:55 GMT+01:00 Achim Nierbeck <bcanhome@googlemail.com
> >>>>>> <mailto:bcanhome@googlemail.com>>:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>      Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>      the other day I added another module to the decanter project
> >>>>>>      (cassandra
> >>>>>>      appender).
> >>>>>>      And I've got to say I was quite astonished to see all those
bnd
> >>>>>>      files in
> >>>>>>      there, but what
> >>>>>>      really got me stirred. It is mandatory to have those now.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>      I can't remember seeing a vote for such a change in
> development!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>      So here is my
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>      -1
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>      on this not communicated and breaking functionality change
that
> >>>>>>      sneaked in
> >>>>>>      there.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>      So whoever changed that needs to revoke this, NOW.
> >>>>>>      It hasn't been discussed up-front and actually I just can't
> stand
> >>>>>>      such
> >>>>>>      sneaky moves.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>      regards, Achim
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>      --
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>      Apache Member
> >>>>>>      Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer
& PMC
> >>>>>>      OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/>
> >>>>>>      Committer &
> >>>>>>      Project Lead
> >>>>>>      blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
> >>>>>>      Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>      Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Christian Schneider
> >>>>>> http://www.liquid-reality.de
> >>>>>> <
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> https://owa.talend.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=3aa4083e0c744ae1ba52bd062c5a7e46&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.liquid-reality.de
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Open Source Architect
> >>>>>> http://www.talend.com
> >>>>>> <
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> https://owa.talend.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=3aa4083e0c744ae1ba52bd062c5a7e46&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.talend.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>> Christian Schneider
> >>>>> http://www.liquid-reality.de
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Open Source Architect
> >>>>> http://www.talend.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >>> jbonofre@apache.org
> >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Christian Schneider
> > http://www.liquid-reality.de
> >
> > Open Source Architect
> > http://www.talend.com
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Apache Member
> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer &
> Project Lead
> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
> Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>
>
> Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master
>



-- 
http://about.me/milen

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