That sounds cool, I like it :)
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> TBH I see this a little bit different. Basically I think we should
> offer only two distributions. One "online" and one "offline". The
> online distribution contains only the absolute bare and minimum system
> (similar to the min distribution now) and would be the "new"
> apache-karaf distribution. This one is the default distribution
> starting up with the bare minimum and the user can install anything he
> wants using features:install getting them online. The offline should
> contain all artifacts (even if it becomes quite big).
>
> IMHO the feature system is sufficient enough (and easy enough to
> understand and use) that this should work.
>
> BUT what I do think could be useful is to add "ueber-features". E.g.
> features:install karaf-clusteredserver, karaf-webserver,
> karaf-obrserver should represent our distribution. I think if we add
> this information in the default startup header
>
> {code}
> KARAF
>
> press tab for ...
>
> To transform karaf into a specific distribution use
>
> * features:install karaf-clusterservice (for a clustered version...
> * ...
> {code}
>
> That way we can be quite minimal and focus on the real code providing
> all distributions only "virtually"... WDYT?
>
> Kind regards,
> Andreas
> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Jamie G. <jamie.goody...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Actually further on to the side discussion of specialized distros,
>> this is something that should be covered in the Karaf user manual.
>> Perhaps a section on how to customize our minimal and/or full distros
>> into a web, OBR, or cluster distro? This would provide our users with
>> plenty of examples of how to go about using our tooling and keep out
>> release foot print more manageable.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> J
>>
>> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Jamie G. <jamie.goody...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I have to say from my perspective offering specialized distributions
>>> doesn't make sense. It should be that users can customize distros
>>> easily via the tooling provided by Karaf. At release time we'll end up
>>> with dozens of release kits for testing and validation (src-zip,
>>> scr-tar,gz, zip, and tar.gz times N distributions).
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jamie
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Guillaume Nodet <gno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Well, the problem is that if we want to offer more using optional
>>>> features, we'll end up with a big bunch of bundles anyway.
>>>> I'm not completely convinced. As discussed in the other thread, I
>>>> wonder if having dedicated distributions for web, obr server,
>>>> clustering would make more sense.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 15:52, mikevan <mvangeert...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Christian Schneider wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Mike,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> while this is sure possible it would be quite big. Especially if you
>>>>>> also would include other projects like camel or activemq.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Instead I propose to add some commands to karaf to download dependencies
>>>>>> to the sytem dir. So the user could load karaf. Add the feature url he
>>>>>> needs and with some simple commands download them to the system dir.
>>>>>> Then he can zip the distro again and use it in the closed environment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that would be much more flexible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Christian
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 03.05.2011 20:46, schrieb mikevan:
>>>>>>> For folks developing applications to deploy into Karaf on closed
>>>>>>> networks, it
>>>>>>> is not always feasable to be able to download all the optional packages
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> which we have optional console commands. I'm thinking web:, http:,
>>>>>>> obr:,
>>>>>>> and the like.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I propse we create a new assembly for karaf that will include all of the
>>>>>>> optional bundles in the system directory for use in closed-networks.
>>>>>>> After
>>>>>>> talking about this topic on IRC it seems that many of us developing on
>>>>>>> closed networks have created work-arounds for this. Because there are
>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>> many work-arounds, perhaps its time to have a single Karaf-Max
>>>>>>> deployment
>>>>>>> that contains all of the optional bundles for karaf.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If it helps, I can write it... :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>> Mike Van (aka karafman)
>>>>>>> Karaf Team (Contributor)
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>>>> http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Karaf-Max-assembly-tp2895460p2895460.html
>>>>>>> Sent from the Karaf - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> ----
>>>>>> http://www.liquid-reality.de
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Another way to think of what would be included in karaf-max is that
>>>>> anything
>>>>> referenced in the karaf features.xml file (think mandatory features and
>>>>> optional features) would be included in the karaf-max release. With this
>>>>> in
>>>>> mind, Apache projects that can be used in Karaf, but aren't referenced in
>>>>> the karaf features.xml documents would not be included. So, ActiveMQ
>>>>> would
>>>>> not be part of the distibution, Camel would not be part of the
>>>>> distribution.
>>>>> However, Aries (included in the enterprise features.xml document) would
>>>>> be,
>>>>> as would the shell libraries for web and obr.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pls let me know if this clarifies things for you.
>>>>>
>>>>> -----
>>>>> Mike Van (aka karafman)
>>>>> Karaf Team (Contributor)
>>>>> --
>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>> http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Karaf-Max-assembly-tp2895460p2898918.html
>>>>> Sent from the Karaf - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>> ------------------------
>>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>>>> ------------------------
>>>> Open Source SOA
>>>> http://fusesource.com
>>>>
>>>> Connect at CamelOne May 24-26
>>>> The Open Source Integration Conference
>>>> http://camelone.com/
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
