Mailing-List: contact river-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of hedhman@gmail.com designates
 72.14.220.157 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        b=jIF2/Gn2wDD+0mjLmu5DOrw9hUvHemKiGXxEwS+0gl1sty6K/ibB24wBAX6e/4sXRM
         MS0W/BdRB9a0XSQOi2KEqNefkMRMi42syilkHoc22T6b/isArveAbkVQ6RaKQ5q2TD56
         Y6l54g3WJRw0uXdnyDyrbfOv6zJ2tE14DOVaU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: hedhman@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <4AD86531.2020103@zeus.net.au>
References: <4AD5FF60.2070207@wonderly.org>
	 <caf30e2a0910141941i7cea75fv780587ffc2e23fa5@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4AD69CBA.1050906@zeus.net.au>
	 <caf30e2a0910152204g413646daq787ad35f5d670d7e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <caf30e2a0910152206r718c91b8qa6a593c01b474b82@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4AD86531.2020103@zeus.net.au>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:40:14 +0800
Message-ID: <caf30e2a0910162040w55d65716g1af64c99921646f0@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Separating out RMIClassLoader dependencies
From: Niclas Hedhman <niclas@hedhman.org>
To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f5ae3645e7370476194508

--001485f5ae3645e7370476194508
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

A big chunk of your bundle analysis already exist in a widely used OSGi
tool, named BND. Most OSGi developers use it, since it is near impossible to
create the metadata by hand, especially the "uses" constraint.

But before that we spoke of figuring out how a particular implementation
wire up a random set of bundles. That is not predictable, nor does the OSGi
spec provides an API to find out. Well, kind of... If you have the loaded
class, you can ask from which bundle it came, but unfortunately the
StackElement doesn't give you the Class, only the class name, which isn't
enough.

But I agree with you that with Jini tech and OSGi's well-defined
classloading semantics one can do really cool stuff. Including getting rid
of some of the more troubling Jini aspects (codebase).

-- Niclas

On Oct 16, 2009 8:21 PM, "Peter Firmstone" <jini@zeus.net.au> wrote:

Hmm, that sounds like opportunity.

A dedicated codebase service has all the time in the world to burn processor
cycles on analysis, as its main task is simply serving up jar files over
networks.

Bytecode analysis, identifies class, package and possibly module API, which
can be stored with the harvested metadata in mirror objects, one for each
class, package and module.  Optional Package metadata could be a potential
source of information too.

Bundles, depend upon and export packages.  Once the API is identified using
bytecode analysis, fast comparison using mirror objects could identify
compatibility.

This could be utilised in two ways:

1. As a check of backward compatibility for modules / packages over
different release versions, for substituting later compatible bundle
versions, if desired.
2. When a dependency on a package only utilises a subset of that package,
the actual API requirements may still be satisfied, even though different
release versions of that package may not usually be interchangeable or fully
compatible.

A module or bundle would exist within its own classloader, in the local jvm.
  The packages or modules upon which it depends could be made available from
other classloaders.

Bundles could be uploaded to codebase services or a codebase service could
retrieve the bundles from designated repository's, perform analysis, then
make the bundles available in a location independent manner, to prevent
codebase loss and allow for redundant codebase services.

Then all one need do is to upload application bundles to the codebase server
and register a service, the service and bytecode could be provided
independently, the codebase service can provide entire application bytecode
built on Jini services and other third party libraries.

Have a look on springsource, there are many OSGi jar bundles available,
these are simply jar files with Metadata.

Someone's done so much hard work already, why not ride the wave?  There are
already support tools available to create application bundle manifests.

The reason I'm considering bundles, is it reduces the number of classloaders
required, one per bundle as opposed to one per package.  One cannot rely on
standard java Package meta data to exist in jar files.

********This doesn't require an OSGi framework.*********

http://blog.springsource.com/2008/02/18/creating-osgi-bundles/

http://www.springsource.com/repository/app/bundle?query=A

http://www.springsource.com/repository/app/faq

>From the website:


    What is the SpringSource Enterprise Bundle Repository?

The SpringSource Enterprise Bundle Repository is a collection of open source
libraries commonly used for developing enterprise Java applications with the
Spring Framework. The repository contains jar files (bundles) and library
definition (".libd") files. A library defines a collection of bundles that
are often used together for some purpose (e.g. the "Spring Framework"
library). There are hundreds of bundles contained in the repository.

The repository meets the following criteria:

  * Every jar file in the repository is a valid OSGi bundle. Any jar
    you download from the repository can be deployed as-is into an
    OSGi Service Platform and the SpringSource dm Server. It can also
    be used as a regular jar file outside of OSGi.
  * Every bundle and library has full version information associated
    with it. The package export information for a bundle contains
    version information, and the package import information for a
    bundle contains full version range compatibility information.
  * The repository is transitively complete. The mandatory
    dependencies of any bundle are guaranteed to also be in the
    repository. Most of the optional dependencies of any bundle in the
    repository will also be present. The bundles listed in any library
    definition are guaranteed to be in the repository.
  * The repository is self-consistent. Before any artefact is uploaded
    to the repository, we verify that it can be installed, resolved,
    and started in an OSGi Service Platform (using the same profile as
    the SpringSource dm Server) alongside all of the other bundles in
    the repository.
  * The repository can be used from Ivy and Maven based builds.

Cheers,

Peter.

Niclas Hedhman wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Niclas Hedhman <
niclas@hedhman.org> wro...

--001485f5ae3645e7370476194508--