Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-synapse-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 76818 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2008 00:36:08 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 19 Aug 2008 00:36:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 47452 invoked by uid 500); 19 Aug 2008 00:36:06 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-synapse-dev-archive@synapse.apache.org Received: (qmail 47379 invoked by uid 500); 19 Aug 2008 00:36:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@synapse.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@synapse.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@synapse.apache.org Received: (qmail 47368 invoked by uid 99); 19 Aug 2008 00:36:06 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:36:06 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of ruwan.linton@gmail.com designates 209.85.142.186 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.142.186] (HELO ti-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.142.186) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 00:35:08 +0000 Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id u3so956273tia.15 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:35:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=8gI5ua8KQwpamX1Yis4+PL4tczdZd1bu0sK/gRuQ2Uo=; b=OEKaBPCepbdzTh863TURZqFtGttIIe9857dwQ43RKnHwWB276/+fXkRjZbPHpOO7DX BNPmDAj5Fv5evELxK6x8FH2GlcUU3EB91jeM+5sJSt5Xod9iPnPBlTW8p3X/YdrE1NIQ IexaFeChqLZPZkCzqvsD4G9uSxIus6QC8XgHk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=qcIKDSYxQ/LC/ZU+w9djWGhnS7uuigp0+3aMcw4n7yipS1kz+LevYmfQKm8FhdT3+p Ydcg3I+/+sZIprfF6y/D7VLlQsrF5iWFrPNZsPUQC1KLZlIFgztrzvivD61/hbgHkKuz e4y2efyzfOOR9UaXKxReU0xQBpZbwprk2gMbE= Received: by 10.110.3.15 with SMTP id 15mr6339231tic.24.1219106136443; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:35:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.110.10.13 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:35:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <672a01200808181735r2ee2c75cr84d767ee3ca8b8ea@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:05:36 +0530 From: "Ruwan Linton" To: dev@synapse.apache.org Subject: Re: Renaming Synapse artifact jar files In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_71221_33552774.1219106136415" References: <672a01200808180948ue9a2f9by933d700f55e04b7e@mail.gmail.com> <48A9B767.4060007@wso2.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_71221_33552774.1219106136415 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline 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. 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 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/ ------=_Part_71221_33552774.1219106136415 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
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.

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/
------=_Part_71221_33552774.1219106136415--