synapse-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Afkham Azeez" <afk...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Renaming Synapse artifact jar files
Date Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:44:51 GMT
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

Mime
View raw message