Github user jpullmann commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/134#discussion_r59012606
  
    --- Diff: 
apache-jena-osgi/jena-osgi/src/main/java/org/apache/jena/osgi/Activator.java ---
    @@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
    +package org.apache.jena.osgi;
    +
    +import org.apache.jena.system.JenaSubsystemRegistry;
    +import org.apache.jena.system.JenaSubsystemRegistryBasic;
    +import org.apache.jena.system.JenaSystem;
    +import org.osgi.framework.BundleActivator;
    +import org.osgi.framework.BundleContext;
    +
    +public class Activator implements BundleActivator {
    +   
    +   /* 
    +    * Based on 
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/aries/trunk/spi-fly/spi-fly-examples/spi-fly-example-provider-consumer-bundle/src/main/java/org/apache/aries/spifly/pc/bundle/Activator.java
    +    * the Activator#start() waits for bundle extension by Aries SPI Fly, 
configures JenaSystem logging and requests for initialization.     
    +    */
    +   public void start(BundleContext context) throws Exception {
    +
    +           Thread t = new Thread(new Runnable() {
    +                   @Override
    +                   public void run() {
    +                           try {
    +                                   Thread.sleep(500);
    +                           } catch (InterruptedException e) {
    +                           }                               
    +                           setUpJena();
    +                   }
    +           });
    +           t.start();
    +   }
    +
    +   private void setUpJena() {
    +           JenaSubsystemRegistry r = new JenaSubsystemRegistryBasic() {
    +                   @Override
    +                   public void load() {
    +                           super.load();
    +                   }
    +           };
    --- End diff --
    
    The OSGi users are used to this process of a painfull dependcy resolution, 
luckily this is due only once at the beginning. While the package dependencies 
are obvoius from the manifest, we should support the resolution of the correct 
(OSGi-aware) Maven archives. This could be done by specifying a provisioning 
configuration, e.g. an [Apache Karaf 
Fature](https://karaf.apache.org/manual/latest/users-guide/provisioning.html) 
or [Equinox/Tycho](https://wiki.eclipse.org/Tycho/Reference_Card) feature. I'll 
need some time to prepare them and to set-up integration tests for these 
platforms (but this is a prerequisite to prove the portability).


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Reply via email to