yes, +1 for the description :) François Papon [email protected]
On 16/08/2018 12:50, Jamie G. wrote: > I like the phrase "Product Project", perhaps we should add that to > Karaf's description ;) > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 6:18 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Hi Toni, >> >> I know a fairly large set of users that use Karaf without knowing OSGi. >> >> That's why it's a polymorphic container: some use spring, some use OSGi, >> some use blueprint, some use directly war, etc. There are several facet >> of using Karaf. >> >> About the distribution, to be honest, I only know users of standard >> distribution: either directly Karaf vanilla and then installing features >> and their applications, or creating their own custom distribution >> starting from the standard one. They don't necessary use the enterprise >> features, it's more the standard distribution + their own features. >> >> One of the key part of Karaf is use friendly. That's the difference >> starting from the framework. When you start from felix framework, it's >> up to you to construct all: logging management, hot deployment, ... >> Starting from Karaf it's a turnkey solution, having all user facing aspects. >> Karaf container and all its subprojects are really focused on user. >> >> Look at Decanter: it's tremendous simple solution but it does the job >> and users just use it. >> >> Karaf is a "product project", it's not a SDK. It's a multi-purpose >> runtime, powered by OSGi, but OSGi is not necessary the user facing model. >> >> That's why, as a "product project", I think it makes sense to have >> regular release pace. >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> On 16/08/2018 10:09, Toni Menzel wrote: >>> As mentioned, here are some more thoughts on Karaf audience/usage. >>> >>> Do you know how Karaf users consume/use Karaf? This is important to get a >>> good release cycle and granularity. (as teased by JB on this list recently). >>> >>> Why i am mentioning that? Well,i always felt that Karaf (the container) is >>> a rather large thing with all its feature repos coming with it. I think >>> thats why Karaf releases where coming rather slow in the past. (correct or >>> not?) >>> >>> *1. Karaf as an opinionated felix distro* >>> >>> This "batteries" included feature is (was?) a core selling point of Karaf >>> but is this really how people use it? >>> I know at least two larger customers who are baking their own Karaf >>> distribution anyway based on the minimal profile. >>> >>> So i am asking, wouldn't it make sense to release the "base" runtime (say >>> Felix+Karaf infrastructure like pax-url, feature system, configuration >>> system) independently? Similar to what you get with Karaf minimal. >>> >>> Depending on how Karaf is used in the real world (do you know?), here are >>> some radical thoughts on my/our personal usage: >>> >>> - Karaf Minimal becomes "Karaf Runtime" because its base unit you can >>> put everything on top (even at runtime). >>> - Karaf Standard/Enterprise becomes the "Karaf SDK" since has the >>> kitchen-sink nature that is great when you want to tinker with >>> Spring,Hibernate etc. >>> >>> Also, wouldn't it make sense to release the maven-plugin independently? >>> >>> Those changes might seem of no importance to Karaf insiders (because you >>> get all of that already when building your own distro) but at least I only >>> found Karaf reasonable for a lot of usecases until i found out how to >>> really only get the "runtime" part. Now i can say that for me Karaf is an >>> opinionated felix distro (yes.. not only that but you get the point). >>> >>> *2. Karaf as polymorphic container* >>> >>> On the website Karaf is marketed as "Karaf can host any kind of >>> applications: OSGi, Spring, WAR, and much more". Is that how people really >>> use it? I mean.. are Spring (Boot..) people happy living inside Karaf? >>> Every OSGi-savvy person recommends going DS, staying with OSGi spec >>> standards and avoid War. - pun intended. >>> Yeah, its great for demos but is it worth the effort? - also to keep this >>> "working". And - from experience - i can tell that its also not a >>> recommendable migration path. It sounds great but Hibernate and friends are >>> actually quite hostile to your OSGi framework instance introducing a lot >>> more complexity into your system. And if even OSGi-savvy people have >>> problems troubleshooting such cases, how should a team of beginners do that? >>> >>> *3. Karaf as a better solution for Microservices* >>> >>> Guess i save this for another post, too easy to turn this into a rant. Let >>> me just say: i think Karaf is one of the few answers to the pervasive >>> Microservice/Spring Boot ecosystem. But it is not obvious and people stay >>> away from it because. Again, this COULD go very long, but it is not the >>> right place. >>> >>> Any thoughts? >>> >>> * What is Developer Ergonomics <https://medium.com/rebaze>**? * >>> >>> >>> >>> *www.rebaze.de <http://www.rebaze.de/> | www.rebaze.com >>> <http://www.rebaze.com/> | @rebazeio <https://twitter.com/rebazeio>* >>> >> -- >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> [email protected] >> http://blog.nanthrax.net >> Talend - http://www.talend.com
