Ioannis / Achim, I think I was just stating the obvious for the sake of having it stated :)
I agree that it would simplify the core of Karaf not to mention that the commands and services don't really use DI. On Dec 5, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Ioannis Canellos <ioca...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well, when I started that POC, I wasn't targeting any future release > of Karaf, as I was not sure if people will like it anyway. > > I don't want to stall Karaf 3.0.0, that's true. But if we can prepare > the ground and finally add this in a Karaf 3.x (as Dan suggested) it > would be a HUGE win for everyone. Mostly, because we will be able to > ship it without rushing a Karaf 4.x which would mean extra overhead in > maintaining multiple major version (especially when we can hardly > managed 2.x and 3.x). > > @Achim: The original idea was to replace blueprint with scr and make > blueprint optional for all distros (not installed by default, but > being available as an option just like spring). The benefits: > > i) A better tool for the job. > ii) Smaller footprint. > iii) Freedom for the user to use the impl and version of blueprint of > his choice. > > @Johan: By no means I'd like to limit the users options. But that > doesn't mean that we should use the same things that the users will > do. The users are building apps and they can pick the most fitting > tool and we on the other hand are building a runtime and we need to > pick the best tool for our job. It doesn't have to be the same tool. > > > -- > Ioannis Canellos > > Blog: http://iocanel.blogspot.com > Twitter: iocanel
