It sounds good to me.
Regards
JB
On 11/20/2016 07:26 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
As I indicated to James, there's absolutely no order returned by the
resolver.
Karaf sorts them alphabetically, so i've raised KARAF-4825 and proposed a
patch which can be further refined.
Guillaume
2016-11-19 12:34 GMT+01:00 Christian Schneider <[email protected]>:
I think it is very important to resolve as many bundles in one go as
possible. When installing them one by one it usually creates the need for
bundle refreshs.
From the numbering of the bundle ids I found a strange thing btw.
When I create a feature with my own bundle and several dependent features
it seems that my own bundle always has the lowest bundle id and the others
follow in the reverse ordering. It looks a bit a like a depth first search.
I wonder if that could be reversed. It at least would make finding the user
bundles simpler at the end of the list.
Not a big thing for me but I wonder if it could be changed.
I am not sure how it works exactly in the feature resolver. If it spits
out a list of bundles at some point then I think it might just work to
install the bundles in the reverse order.
Christian
On 18.11.2016 17:03, James Carman wrote:
Yes, I've tried using staged boot, but in 3.0.x it caused some classpath
issues with CXF. It would be great if we could just set up our features
so
that they're just installed in the order they're defined.
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:56 AM Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]>
wrote:
You mean installing the features one by one instead of all in one go ?
Have you tried using
(myfeature1,myfeature2),(myfeature3,myfeature4)
so that you end up with 2 stages ?
Ultimately, you can use
(myfeature1),(myfeature2),(myfeature3),(myfeature4)
2016-11-18 16:44 GMT+01:00 James Carman <[email protected]>:
Karaf 3.0.8+ now provides predictable boot feature startup order, but the
4.0.x line does not provide that guarantee. It apparently tries to be
smart and figure out what you need, but sometimes it just works better
if
we can let the user control things explicitly. Is there, perhaps, a
compromise here? Could we perhaps have a switch in the
org.apache.karaf.features.cfg file that allows you to turn on manual
control of the startup order? I'm not the only one who has encountered
this issue. There have been emails recently where other folks have
observed it. Thoughts?
James
--
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Red Hat, Open Source Integration
Email: [email protected]
Web: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
--
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de
Open Source Architect
http://www.talend.com
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
