I like the idea! Maybe we can include the "original" pax-web features file then?
Kind regards, Andreas On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 08:56, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi David, > > good questions. > > I think it could have sense to have a karaf-spring features XML containing > only the Spring features, especially with Cave acting as a Karaf Features > Repository (KFR). > > It means that the standard feature will contain: > - obr > - http > - war > - wrapper > - config > - jetty > - http-whiteboard > - kar > - webconsole > - ssh > - management > - scheduler > - eventadmin > - jasypt-encryption > > In that case, we could also provide a karaf-webcontainer features XML > gathering http, war, http-whiteboard features. > The standard will contain only pure Karaf core features. I would also > rename "standard" to "core", as I'm not sure that standard means really > something ;) > > WDYT ? > > Regards > JB > > > On 08/31/2011 08:51 AM, David Jencks wrote: > >> I keep wondering how "standard" the spring features are and wonder if they >> would be better in a separate "spring" feature repository. Thoughts? >> >> (I'm thinking trunk only) >> >> thanks >> david jencks >> >> > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > [email protected] > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com >
