Hi Carsten This looks very interesting!
Regarding the format, have you considered YAML? It is a superset of JSON (well, it's designed to also support JSON syntax) and it allows comments out of the box. Furthermore, it's well specified (in contrast to JSON with comments). I assume that using YAML, people could choose whether they want to write it more JSOn style or YAML style. Regards Julian On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Robert Munteanu <romb...@apache.org> wrote: > On Wed, 2017-10-04 at 10:01 +0200, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: >> Robert Munteanu wrote> On Tue, 2017-10-03 at 11:52 +0200, Carsten >> Ziegeler wrote: >> >> > > > 2. Reading the section on configuration merging, it is not >> > > > clear to >> > > > me >> > > > if merging is merging of values or overriding of values. >> > > > >> > > > Consider >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > feature 1: >> > > > >> > > > com.foo.bar.Service >> > > > prop1="A" >> > > > prop2="B" >> > > > >> > > > feature 2: >> > > > >> > > > com.foo.bar.Service >> > > > prop1="C" >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > After the merge, will the configuration define the prop2 >> > > > property? >> > > >> > > Yes, values get overwritten. >> > >> > Is there any way of removing a configuration property once it's >> > defined >> > in a feature? >> > >> >> Yes, if a feature is includes other features, the include instruction >> can have any number of removals. >> So you can remove properties before, bundles etc. > > > So I guess we have most (or even all) annoyances from the provisioning > model covered, which is great. > > Thanks, > > Robert
