On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 5:49 PM, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'd like to see an example in action before I commit myself but so far I > don't see any problems with this. I assume you have already or will soon > verify this doesn't cause problems with the tck :-)
Fair enough ;-) I may ping someone, as I've never worked on the TCK so far. > > I wonder if a package name with "osgi" in it somewhere would be more > appropriate? Agreed. > > There are some specs (jacc for instance) that use a system property to > figure out what to create. I've always thought this was a less than > brilliant idea and wonder if we can do something similar for those. I also > wonder if there is a way to generalize the osgi method so it might work in > some non-osgi environments. I'm looking forward to seeing what you have in > mind. I guess you are talking about the PolicyConfigurationFactory in jacc. I suppose we could extend the mechanism to include searching through the META-INF/services/xxx stuff instead of simply relying on a system property. However, the mechanism I'm thinking about is quite specific to OSGi (at least in its implementation). > > thanks > david jencks > > > On Apr 16, 2008, at 8:20 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > In the past months, I've been working on making the specs jars from Geronimo > working in an OSGi environment. > All these jars have been published and work great :-) > However, lots of these spec jars define factories (stax, saaj for example) > that use the META-INF/services/ discovery mechanism to find an > implementation of the spec and load it. This mechanism does not fit well in > OSGi (really, it does not), mainly because usually, the classloader > containing the spec jar will not contain the implementation. > I'd like to work on these spec jars so that they will contain an OSGi > BundleActivator that would change the behavior of these factories when > deployed in an OSGi environment (without changing the behavior in other > case). The idea is that the activator would scan OSGi bundles when they are > started to find META-INF/services and populate a map that would be used by > the factory when creating an object before using the standard mechanism. > > The only real difference compared to what we currently have would be the > addition of a package named org.apache.geronimo.specs.stax (for example) > that would contain the needed classes (i suppose two classes), and the > modification of the factories to delegate to one of these class before using > the standard behavior (the class would do nothing if not deployed in an OSGi > environment). > Has anyone any objection with such an enhancement in the specs jar ? > > -- > Cheers, > Guillaume Nodet > ------------------------ > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ > -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
