I'll do the changes related to the ext package today.

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 04:38, Jeremy Hughes <[email protected]> wrote:

> OK, there's been some talk of changes needed before I do a
> blueprint-core and blueprint-bundle release. Dan's checked-in his
> change, what's left to do?
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
>
> On 11 November 2011 12:25, Alasdair Nottingham <[email protected]> wrote:
> > +1 I'd like to get an agreed upon set of interfaces and utilities for
> plugging into blueprint. One that we know to keep stable and doesn't expose
> the entire implementation. Something to consider as part of a 1.0 release
> perhaps?
> >
> > Alasdair
> >
> > Alasdair Nottingham
> >
> > On 11 Nov 2011, at 09:45, Timothy Ward <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Exporting the ext package is fine by me, as long as (as you suggested)
> we move the implementation classes out of it. While we're moving these
> things, I'd like to ask whether PropertyPlaceholder is actually API or not.
> I know it's extended by CM, so I originally assumed it was, but is that
> actually the right thing to do? Thoughts?
> >>
> >> Tim
> >>
> >>> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:57:18 -0800
> >>> Subject: Re: Problems deploying blueprint-cm ?
> >>> From: [email protected]
> >>> To: [email protected]
> >>>
> >>> I haven't created the ComponentFactoryMetadata
> >>> and DependentComponentFactoryMetadata interfaces but they sound to me
> like
> >>> part of the api.
> >>> Given that, I'm kinda enclined to move back the PropertyPlaceholder
> >>> and PlaceholdersUtils classes where they were and instead of not
> exporting
> >>> the ext package, rather move the only class which is not part of a
> public
> >>> api (the ext namespace handler implementation) into a private
> subpackage.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 13:23, Jeremy Hughes <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Please go ahead and open JIRAs / make the changes you need in trunk
> >>>> and I'll merge them into the branch and release.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Jeremy
> >>>>
> >>>> On 10 November 2011 21:21, Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>> I'd really like the AbstractPlaceholder to be moved in the utils
> package
> >>>> so
> >>>>> that it can be extended (karaf needs it).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 12:58, Jeremy Hughes <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 10 November 2011 17:11, Timothy Ward <[email protected]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Can you remeber which artifacts will be affected? I think
> >>>>>>> blueprint-core, blueprint-bundle and blueprint-itests. I can't
> >>>> remember
> >>>>>>> if one of the proxy bundles had a problem in 047 too.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I suppose we can check the vote history to find out.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Three bundles changed in attempt #3 they were from the blueprint-cm
> >>>>>> blueprint-core and blueprint-bundle modules. The blueprint-cm and
> >>>>>> blueprint-bundle modules are dated 28th Oct, just before I sent the
> >>>>>> attempt #3 vote email. The blueprint-core module artifacts are dated
> >>>>>> 25th Oct which corresponds to the attempt #1 vote.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Are we good to release (0.4.1) what's in trunk for blueprint-core
> and
> >>>>>> then of course release blueprint-bundle to make sure
> blueprint-bundle
> >>>>>> contains the correct blueprint-core ? Or are there some fixes needed
> >>>>>> before we do that?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Tim
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> From: [email protected]
> >>>>>>>> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 16:45:34 +0000
> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Problems deploying blueprint-cm ?
> >>>>>>>> To: [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 10 November 2011 16:29, Jeremy Hughes <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 10 November 2011 15:23, Timothy Ward <[email protected]
> >
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 05:40:58 -0800
> >>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Problems deploying blueprint-cm ?
> >>>>>>>>>>> From: [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>>>> To: [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 05:32, Timothy Ward <
> >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> That's odd, I don't have any uncommitted changes, but my
> >>>>>> blueprint-core
> >>>>>>>>>>>> bundle has the following export package list, which does
> >>>> include
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> blueprint utils:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Export-Package:
> >>>>>> org.apache.aries.blueprint;version="0.4";uses:="org.os
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> gi.service.blueprint.reflect,org.osgi.framework,org.w3c.dom",org.apac
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> he.aries.blueprint.mutable;version="0.3.2";uses:="org.osgi.service.bl
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> ueprint.reflect,org.apache.aries.blueprint,org.osgi.framework",org.ap
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> ache.aries.blueprint.ext.evaluator;version="0.3.2",org.apache.aries.b
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> lueprint.services;version="0.4";uses:="org.osgi.framework,org.apache.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> aries.blueprint,org.osgi.service.blueprint.container",org.apache.arie
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> s.blueprint.utils;version="0.4.0";uses:="org.osgi.framework,org.apach
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> e.aries.blueprint,org.osgi.service.blueprint.reflect,org.apache.aries
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> .blueprint.mutable,org.osgi.service.blueprint.container,org.slf4j,org
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> .apache.aries.blueprint.ext.evaluator,org.apache.aries.blueprint.serv
> >>>>>>>>>>>> ices",org.osgi.service.blueprint;version="1.0.0"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> For some reason, that does not seem to be the case with the
> >>>> released
> >>>>>>>>>>> artifact..  Not sure what happened.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I see what you mean - the artifact in the maven repository
> doesn't
> >>>>>> match the source from the oct2011 branch, or the 0.4 tag for that
> >>>> bundle...
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> We may need Jeremy's input here. It's possible that the wrong
> >>>> thing
> >>>>>> got promoted, or maybe I don't fully understand the release process!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Oh dear. I released the two staging repo's voted on, so I don't
> >>>> know
> >>>>>>>>> what's happened here. I'll look into what's in the Apache
> releases
> >>>>>>>>> repo.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This is incredibly frustrating. I can only imagine the
> blueprint-core
> >>>>>>>> release that I deleted from the 047 staging repo was published by
> >>>>>>>> Nexus instead of the one in the 116 staging repo. I've checked my
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> blueprint/blueprint-core/target/checkout/target/org.apache.aries.blueprint.core-0.4.jar
> >>>>>>>> and it is dated 28th Oct as are the ones in my local .m2
> repository,
> >>>>>>>> whereas the one in the releases repo is dated 25th Oct. So I
> really
> >>>>>>>> don't know what has happened here. Since the artifacts will have
> >>>>>>>> likely been mirrored the only sensible thing is for me to run a
> 0.4.1
> >>>>>>>> release of the affected artifacts.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I don't see the core bundle exporting either of the blueprint
> >>>> API
> >>>>>> packages
> >>>>>>>>>>>> (org.osgi.service.blueprint.container or
> >>>>>>>>>>>> org.osgi.service.blueprint.reflect), but it does export the
> >>>> empty
> >>>>>> package
> >>>>>>>>>>>> org.osgi.service.blueprint, which I think is spec mandated to
> >>>>>> come from the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> blueprint implementation. I'll check that one to be sure.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Yep, that's right.  I was fooled by the fact that it used
> another
> >>>>>> api I
> >>>>>>>>>>> deployed earlier.  Sorry about that.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Note that the spec also mandates that the blueprint extender
> >>>>>> provides
> >>>>>>>>>>> (exporting and not importing) its own api so that multiple
> >>>>>> extenders can't
> >>>>>>>>>>> be wired to the same api, as that's what is used to make sure
> >>>>>> multiple
> >>>>>>>>>>> extenders can coexists peacefully.  Given the extender checks
> for
> >>>>>>>>>>> compatibilty, if each extender has its own api, and provided
> that
> >>>>>> blueprint
> >>>>>>>>>>> bundles import the api as mandated by the spec, there's no
> >>>>>> inconsistency,
> >>>>>>>>>>> even if you can't easily choose which extender is used for a
> >>>> given
> >>>>>> bundle.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> As for property placeholder support, my understanding (based
> on
> >>>>>> the cm
> >>>>>>>>>>>> implementation) was that people who wanted property
> >>>> placeholders
> >>>>>> either
> >>>>>>>>>>>> used or subclassed PropertyPlaceHolder (which is currently
> >>>> still
> >>>>>> possible),
> >>>>>>>>>>>> and that the AbstractPropertyPlaceHolder was for internal use
> >>>> by
> >>>>>> blueprint.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I could be wrong with my understanding of the API here, and if
> >>>> so
> >>>>>> I have no
> >>>>>>>>>>>> problem working to improve/correct it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The PropertyPlaceHolder can be used in some cases, but I have a
> >>>>>> custom
> >>>>>>>>>>> namespace which actually use the AbstractPropertyPlaceHolder,
> >>>> where
> >>>>>> most of
> >>>>>>>>>>> the processing is done.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> My main aim with the packaging changes is to make sure that
> the
> >>>>>> blueprint
> >>>>>>>>>>>> bundles use good OSGi practice and therefore define a proper
> >>>> API.
> >>>>>> Previous
> >>>>>>>>>>>> versions of blueprint have exposed every package, including
> >>>>>> classes that I
> >>>>>>>>>>>> definitely wouldn't expect to be API (for example the recipes
> >>>> or
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> internal parser implementation). I do want it to be possible
> to
> >>>>>> write
> >>>>>>>>>>>> functional namespace handlers, but I don't expect them to be
> >>>> able
> >>>>>> to change
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the internal behaviour of blueprint (for example how beans are
> >>>>>>>>>>>> instantiated, or injected with dependencies) unless they are
> >>>>>> either the ext
> >>>>>>>>>>>> namespace (which is internal and a bit special) or built as
> >>>>>> fragments that
> >>>>>>>>>>>> add to the core blueprint function.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> When making this change I was careful to make sure that any
> >>>>>> existing
> >>>>>>>>>>>> namespace handlers I knew of (JPA, TX, CM) were able to keep
> >>>>>> working. This
> >>>>>>>>>>>> did require some changes to the CM bundle, which had numerous
> >>>>>> (and some
> >>>>>>>>>>>> unnecessary) couplings to the blueprint internals, but not to
> >>>> the
> >>>>>> others.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is there something else from blueprint that we should make
> part
> >>>>>> of the API,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> or perhaps expose as a service, to help other namespaces?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm not aware of anything else for now beyond
> >>>>>>>>>>> the AbstractPropertyPlaceHolder.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tim
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 03:26:39 -0800
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Problems deploying blueprint-cm ?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> From: [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> To: [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually, it's not exported by blueprint-core either even if
> >>>>>> the pom says
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> so for some reason. Here's the list of exported packages by
> >>>>>>>>>>>> blueprint-core
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> from its manifest:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Export-Package:
> >>>>>> org.apache.aries.blueprint;version="0.4";uses:="org.os
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> gi.service.blueprint.reflect,org.osgi.framework,org.w3c.dom",org.apac
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> he.aries.blueprint.mutable;version="0.3.2";uses:="org.osgi.service.bl
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> ueprint.reflect,org.apache.aries.blueprint,org.osgi.framework",org.ap
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> ache.aries.blueprint.ext.evaluator;version="0.3.2",org.apache.aries.b
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> lueprint.services;version="0.4";uses:="org.osgi.framework,org.apache.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> aries.blueprint,org.osgi.service.blueprint.container",org.osgi.servic
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> e.blueprint;version="1.0.0"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Also blueprint-core seems to export blueprint-api (I thought
> >>>>>> only the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> full
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> blueprint bundle was supposed to aggregate those).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> So given the util package isn't exported at all,
> >>>> blueprint-core
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> blueprint-cm seems unusable to me.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> As for the util package itself, exporting it is actually not
> >>>>>> sufficient.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The PlaceholderUtils is using the
> >>>> AbstractPropertyPlaceholder
> >>>>>> to check
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> consistency of placeholders, but that class isn't exported
> >>>>>> anymore, so
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> downstream namespace handlers can't use it.   Even if we fix
> >>>>>>>>>>>> blueprint-core
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to export the utils package, that class need to be made
> >>>>>> available somehow
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> so that it can be extended, so I suppose it'd have to be
> >>>> moved
> >>>>>> to utils
> >>>>>>>>>>>> too.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 03:17, Timothy Ward <
> >>>>>> [email protected]>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.aries.blueprint.utils is exported by the
> >>>> blueprint
> >>>>>> core
> >>>>>>>>>>>> bundle
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> at version 0.4. As you identified in another thread it
> >>>> should
> >>>>>> also be
> >>>>>>>>>>>> being
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> exported by the blueprint-bundle, but isn't. As for
> >>>> deploying
> >>>>>>>>>>>> blueprint-cm,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe it's possible if you install blueprint-api and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> blueprint-core,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> but as another approach, doesn't the blueprint-bundle
> >>>> contain
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> blueprint-cm function by default? I think that should
> >>>> deploy
> >>>>>> fine as
> >>>>>>>>>>>> it's
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> what's used in the CM itests.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I hope this is helpful.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tim
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 15:10:44 -0800
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Problems deploying blueprint-cm ?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can someone point me to a process for deploying
> >>>>>> blueprint-cm ?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems that bundle requires
> >>>>>> org.apache.aries.blueprint.utils
> >>>>>>>>>>>> package
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which isn't exported by any bundle afaik.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It really looks like the most recent changes in blueprint
> >>>>>> completely
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> broke
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the bundles ....
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts welcome ( before I get really pissed ;-) )
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Nodet
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Open Source SOA
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://fusesource.com
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Nodet
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Open Source SOA
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://fusesource.com
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Nodet
> >>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> >>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>> Open Source SOA
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://fusesource.com
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> ------------------------
> >>>>> Guillaume Nodet
> >>>>> ------------------------
> >>>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> >>>>> ------------------------
> >>>>> Open Source SOA
> >>>>> http://fusesource.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> ------------------------
> >>> Guillaume Nodet
> >>> ------------------------
> >>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> >>> ------------------------
> >>> Open Source SOA
> >>> http://fusesource.com
> >>
> >
>



-- 
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

Reply via email to