Maybe you didn't look into it so much or not fully understand what it
does?;-O
It may not matter so much to

https://brooklyn.incubator.apache.org/v/latest/java/topology-dependencies-management-policies.html
shows some pretty straightforward calls like

      .configure("memberSpec", EntitySpec.create(JBoss7Server.class)
                        .configure("httpPort", "8080+")
                        .configure("war", WAR_PATH)

.configure(JavaEntityMethods.javaSysProp("brooklyn.example.db.url"),


So far, Tamaya has just positioned itself as "Runtime Configuration" system
inside the container. Thus competing with e.g. Apache Commons Config or
DeltaSpike Config quite a bit already (the latter is on board, so we should
see synergies or "partnerships" here anyway ;-)

Brooklyn is more "Provisioning" and "Deployment Configuration" for Cloud
systems. It helps model and define deployments and environments, especially
those are also known to Tamaya, thus having a "Multiconf" written in Java
could help configure applications running Tamaya at runtime, too. And avoid
duplicate or mismatching ways these things are configured. For the benefit
of developers and "Ops". If we keep reinventing the wheel for runtime where
other components regardless of the language (or Open Source model) they use
define something, then Tamaya IMHO will be a failure;-)

Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec Lead |
Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer | Advisory
Board Member, Java Track Chair, DWX '15

Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR377 | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj |
#EclipseUOMo
| #DeviceMap | #DevOps
Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil

On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Seems out of scope for me. If you want partnerships tons of other projects
> would make more sense to me but we should stop adding things around while
> we didnt release anything. Just makes the core weaker than we need. Let
> stabilize, release and add...otherwise value of tamaya would be in
> extensions then tamaya would IMO be a failure.
>  Le 8 mars 2015 09:19, "Oliver B. Fischer" <[email protected]> a
> écrit :
>
> > Hi Werner,
> >
> > I will have a look at it today...
> >
> > Am 07.03.15 um 11:10 schrieb Werner Keil:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Have any of you heard about or looked at Apache Brooklyn, also
> incubating
> >> right now:
> >> https://brooklyn.incubator.apache.org/
> >>
> >> Especially on the Java side (it supports other languages, too) a
> "Brooklyn
> >> Bridge" for Tamaya could be beneficial to both. Given there are many
> >> configuration aspects to Brooklyn, especially for defining and applying
> >> configurations it looks promising and interesting.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Werner
> >>
> >>
> > --
> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> > P +49 30 44793251
> > M +49 178 7903538
> > E [email protected]
> > S oliver.b.fischer
> > J [email protected]
> > X http://xing.to/obf
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to