clerezza-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Minto van der Sluis <mi...@xup.nl>
Subject Re: No TcManager instance available
Date Mon, 07 Apr 2014 19:45:27 GMT
Hi Reto,

Reto Gmür schreef op 7-4-2014 19:24:
>> Freshly building my stuff against the latest Clerezza snapshot
>> introduced a problem where some of my bundles couldn't start due their
>> dependency on TcManager.
>>
>> Looking at the rdf.core bundle karaf tell me the following services:
>>
>>     karaf@root>bundle:services  147
>>
>>     Clerezza - SCB Core (147) provides:
>>     -----------------------------------
>>     [org.apache.clerezza.rdf.core.serializedform.Serializer]
>>     [org.apache.clerezza.rdf.core.sparql.QueryParser]
>>     [org.apache.clerezza.rdf.core.serializedform.Parser]
>>
>> I expected to see TcManager in here as well.
>>
> It could be that TcManager has no longer all dependency satisfied with the
> new requirement introduced with CLEREZZA-885.
It appeared the SingleTdbDatasetTcProvider even though marked as general
purpose in the sources did not have that property in my environment.
Adding that property the configuration did the trick. The provider was
properly marked and TcManager was able to start/run.

>> Previously I used Blueprint to inject the TcManager service into my
>> bundles like this:
>>
>>   <reference id="clerezzaManagerServiceRef"
>>     ext:proxy-method="classes"
>>     interface="org.apache.clerezza.rdf.core.access.TcManager" />
>>
>> Apparently this doesn't work anymore. Is the getInstance() method the
>> only left?
>>
>>     TcManager.getInstance();
>>
>> I thought this one was for none OSGi environments. Is there another way?
>> Can you please explain how I can access the active TcManager.
>>
> Clearly the static method should not be used.
> Well, it seems you don't have an a active TcManager the most likely cause
> given the zz-885 change is that you don't have a TcProvider marked as
> general purpose. It should be easy to mark your TcProvider as
> general-purpose, but we can also discuss zz-885, maybe it was a bad idea.
Personally I fail to see the benefit. If there is no TcProvider there
will also not be a general-purpose provider. So the behaviour is
probably still the same as before. In my opinion it does not solve the
issue you had in the first place.
>
> Cheers,
> Reto
Fortunately I was able to resolve my issue. Thanks for that.

I also have some other issue/things to discuss, but I will use a
separate thread for that.

Regards,

Minto

-- 
ir. ing. Minto van der Sluis
Software innovator / renovator
Xup BV

Mobiel: +31 (0) 626 014541


Mime
View raw message