Hi Toni,
thanks for your comments! I think what you're saying boils down to not
worrying too much about "historical" details of Pax Runner 1.x but
trying to work out what Pax Runner 2.x should be...
Am 10.12.2011 15:22, schrieb Toni Menzel:
Now, i think i wrote that
some time ago on the list, i see Pax Runner 1.x (as it is today) as a
legacy. World has changed, frameworks are aligned (OSGi Launch API),
properties are standardized etc.
I fully agree...
Thats why i personally stopped copying
around the config files for every over release of
felix/equinox/knopflerfish. I think it needs a Pax Runner 2 that just
works with any 4.x compliant framework, perhaps requiring new major
releases per 4.x OSGi Spec release, but not anything else.
...but at least we'll have to do some maintenance for Pax Runner 1.x
while Pax Runner 2 is just an idea ;-)
I see Pax Runner
still mentioned on all kinds of "Getting Started with OSGi" Blogs &
Articles, so something is useful with it i guess..
Yes, but what are the use cases for "end users"? All your suggestions
(which I'm not quoting here) are very valid and interesting but rather
technical...
People who need an interactive shell for OSGi can just use the built-in
shell of Equinox or Felix Gogo or the Karaf Shell or whatever...
People who develop on OSGi and need to launch their applications have
Eclipse PDE or a build script or something like that.
People who need to test OSGi applications have Pax Exam :-)
Actually, from the Pax Exam perspective, there two important use cases
which currently require the Pax Runner Container and cannot be covered
by the Native Container (and now I'm getting technical again):
1) Running the same tests on multiple versions of different frameworks.
2) Classloader isolation.
Both of these could be covered by a "Remote Native Container" which uses
nothing but the Framework launch API to start an OSGi framework in a
separate VM.
I suppose the pax-exam-container-remote module was a start in that
direction.
Maybe Pax Exam is not the best place for this remote container - it
might instead be the basis of a Pax Runner 2...?
Cheers,
Harald
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
