So the solution may be to provide a flag in code gen about whether to add 
the jars or not into the generated project.

Also, I think this is a problem as well when deploying on J2EE. It would 
be better if common JARs (muse) can be placed in the common/shared folder 
of the app server (almost all of them have one).

Balan Subramanian 
Autonomic Computing, IBM, RTP, NC
919.543.0197 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]






Daniel Jemiolo/Durham/[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
01/03/2007 11:48 AM
Please respond to
[email protected]


To
[email protected]
cc

Subject
Re: Different packaging for OSGi based endpoints






Joel is the authority here, so I will defer to him, but I believe the 
reason that all Muse JARs are packaged as OSGi bundles is to fit into the 
OSGi deployment model. One copy of the bundles (each representing one Muse 

JAR, except in the case of muse-util-all, which has all the utility JARs) 
for each Equinox deployment. The confusion may be that when wsdl2java 
generates an OSGi project, it copies over all of the Equinox/Muse JARs 
into the new project, in addition to the user's new code and XML files; if 

you generate a new project, it will do so again, rather than adding the 
new resource type files to the same Equinox installation.

But again, I'd like to hear from Joel.

Dan



Balan Subramanian/Raleigh/[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/03/2007 10:55:02 AM:

> The OSGi bundling of WSDM endpoints is gaining a lot of popularity 
> particularly with the possibility of J2ME being supported officially in 
> 2.2.
> 
> If I understand correctly, each endpoint deployed in an OSGi container 
> will drag along with it, its own set of Muse JAR files and will also 
load 
> them separately per endpoint. This is a huge concern for some deployers 
> given the additional footprint both on disk and memory. Also it seems 
> contrary to OSGi design principles to have multiple instances of the 
same 
> bundles running.
> 
> Please correct me if I am wrong - it would be great if this issue has 
> already been addressed. However if not, is this something that can be 
> addressed in 2.2?
> 
> Balan Subramanian 
> Autonomic Computing, IBM, RTP, NC
> 919.543.0197 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Reply via email to