synapse-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ruwan Linton" <ruwan.lin...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Renaming Synapse artifact jar files
Date Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:48:48 GMT
After considering all the comments I think we better change the bundle
symbolic name to be the synapse-transports followed by the version.

Thanks for all the comments...

Ruwan

On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 7:14 AM, Afkham Azeez <afkham@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think having bundle names such as
> org.apache.synapse.transport_SNAPSHOT.jar is just a convention, mainly
> adopted by Eclipse Equinox. Some projects like WSO2 Carbon (
> http://wso2.org/projects/carbon) have adopted this convention to the
> extent that even the Maven2 modules/folders have this convention (
> https://wso2.org/repos/wso2/trunk/carbon), but there is no hard and fast
> rule to adopt it.
>
> Thanks
> Azeez
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 6:41 AM, Saminda Abeyruwan <samindaa@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Ruwan Linton <ruwan.linton@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Asankha/Saminda,
>>>
>>> I just wanted the OSGi bundles to be in its standard way and it is
>>> possible to understand the artifact names that are already there, but if we
>>> go with that structure then the bundle names are going to be
>>> synapse-core_SNAPSHOT.jar and so on which is not the standard of OSGi.
>>>
>>
>> There is no accepted norm to publish bundles as org.foo.bar_<versio>.jar.
>> People just do it  for convenience and nothing more. Using bundle names as
>> prior is not a standard of OSGi, merely a convenience way of describing
>> bundle information.
>>
>> Saminda
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I will try to create two artifacts one as the OSGi bundle and the other
>>> as a pure jar file.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ruwan
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:55 PM, Saminda Abeyruwan <samindaa@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> IMHO, Synapse folks can keep the physical names of MVN artifacts as it
>>>> is. Physical names are opaque and wouldn't reflect much information w.r.t
to
>>>> OSGi standards.
>>>>
>>>> Even the bundle-symbolicName can be anything and doesn't need to follow
>>>> strict patterns. Normally when we create a bundle, for ex: consider the
>>>> following example,
>>>>
>>>> if the package structure of a project
>>>> +- org
>>>>          +- foo
>>>>                   +- bar
>>>>                             +- internal
>>>>                                              +- Activator.jar
>>>>                        +- Foo.jar
>>>>                         ..
>>>>                              +- car
>>>>                                       +-  Foo1.java
>>>>
>>>> We normally select the bundle-symbolicName as "org.foo.bar". As this
>>>> could be considered as the parent of all other packages. Hence, when a
>>>> user/developer looking the meta-date of the bundle, one be able to get a
>>>> good understanding of the packaging structure.
>>>>
>>>> In order to make the life easy for user/developer who use this bundles,
>>>> the physical name of the bundle also named with the bundle-symbolicName.
>>>> This is just a convenience factor for users/developers.
>>>>
>>>> If someone adheres to prior way of naming bundles, it's very convenient
>>>> to distinguish bundles. Ex: org.foo.bar Vs org.foo.bar.ui.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  In-order to achieve this we will need to change the names of the artifacts
>>>>> to the following format.
>>>>>
>>>>> synapse-transport-SNAPSHOT.jar ==>
>>>>> org.apache.synapse.transports-SNAPSHOT.jar
>>>>> synapse-core-SNAPSHOT.jar ==> org.apache.synapse.core-SNAPSHOT.jar
>>>>>
>>>>> and so on.... WDYT?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  Awwww.. I personally don't like the above file names at all.. if OSGi
>>>>> cannot understand them, they should fix it.. can we raise a JIRA against
it?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Any OSGi implementation can understand  the previous names.  I believe
>>>> Ruwan is trying to make the names more self informative and descriptive.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Sometime back we did a lot to be Maven 2 compatible across many
>>>>> projects.. I don't want to change everything now just so that OSGi
>>>>> understands them..
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> However, if you can generate a build target that generates these OSGi
>>>>> bundles on some profile, as a copy of the existing artifacts - and we
upload
>>>>> them to maven 2 etc, - I am totally fine with that.. is that possible?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1. Since Synapse is quite famous around the community and it's not IMHO
>>>> time to change the names of the main artifacts. As Asankha has said, it's
>>>> worth to build the OSGi bundles separately using MVN  semantics  and used
by
>>>> OSGi community.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you!
>>>>
>>>> Saminda
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ruwan Linton
>>> http://wso2.org - "Oxygenating the Web Services Platform"
>>> http://ruwansblog.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> Afkham Azeez
>
> http://afkham.org
> http://www.wso2.org
> GPG Fingerprint: 643F C2AF EB78 F886 40C9 B2A2 4AE2 C887 665E 0760
>



-- 
Ruwan Linton
http://wso2.org - "Oxygenating the Web Services Platform"
http://ruwansblog.blogspot.com/

Mime
View raw message