Hi,

sounds like a great idea, count me in (I can cover the DS part)

Carsten


2013/10/9 David Bosschaert <[email protected]>

> Yes, I agree.
>
> The nice thing is that because all the RFPs and RFCs are now visible
> to everyone at https://github.com/osgi/design we can get feedback from
> the whole community.
>
> Cheers,
>
> David
>
> On 9 October 2013 11:24, Christian Schneider <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > Hi David,
> >
> > sure I can help with the RFP.
> > I hope we also get people from ds and spring dm on board as it makes most
> > sense if we have a common solution.
> >
> > Christian
> >
> >
> > On 09.10.2013 11:51, David Bosschaert wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Christian,
> >>
> >> If you think it makes sense to standardize something like this, I can
> >> work with you on getting an OSGi RFP started on this topic. Once there
> >> is some initial content, we can put it on
> >> https://github.com/osgi/design for further feedback.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> David
> >>
> >> On 9 October 2013 10:43, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Christian,
> >>>
> >>> as blueprint is part of OSGi specification, it makes sense to be
> >>> introduce a
> >>> new "optional" status for bundle that use blueprint.
> >>>
> >>> Let see what the others think about that.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> JB
> >>>
> >>> On 10/09/2013 11:39 AM, Christian Schneider wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Nowadays dependency injection technologies like blueprint, ds and
> spring
> >>>> dm are used a lot in OSGi. All these have in common that they are
> >>>> extender based. So instead of using an activator you have an extender
> >>>> that detects if you use such a technology and initializes the bundle.
> >>>>
> >>>> Unfortunately this makes diagnosing the status of your system a lot
> >>>> harder. A bundle can be active and still the blueprint context may
> have
> >>>> failed to create or the extender is even absent. The case of no
> extender
> >>>> can be nicely solved by capabilities which seem to be introduced in
> the
> >>>> newest spec proposals.
> >>>>
> >>>> What I have not yet seen is a common status and error reporting. I
> have
> >>>> written such a thing for karaf where the bundle status is combined
> from
> >>>> the OSGi bundle status + e.g. the blueprint status if the bundle uses
> >>>> blueprint. I also created a diag command that shows blueprint errors
> to
> >>>> make it easier to spot problems.
> >>>>
> >>>> Would it make sense to standardize this? Perhaps by allowing an
> extender
> >>>> to override the reported status of a bundle? I also think it would be
> >>>> nice to have a common api to get some diagnosis state for bundles. You
> >>>> could ask this api about a bundle id and it could return a list of
> >>>> exceptions provided by all extenders that processed the bundle.
> >>>>
> >>>> I am currently working an a pax exam improvement to have an assertion
> >>>> like this but it would be a lot nicer if the OSGi framework would
> >>>> already provide such an API and if the DI framework could already add
> >>>> diagnostic infos. So the pax exam assertion could then just rely on
> the
> >>>> api and not care about all the technologies.
> >>>>
> >>>> Christian
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> --
> >>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >>> [email protected]
> >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> OSGi Developer Mail List
> >>> [email protected]
> >>> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OSGi Developer Mail List
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Christian Schneider
> > http://www.liquid-reality.de
> >
> > Open Source Architect
> >
> > http://www.talend.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OSGi Developer Mail List
> > [email protected]
> > https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
> _______________________________________________
> OSGi Developer Mail List
> [email protected]
> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
>



-- 
Carsten Ziegeler
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
OSGi Developer Mail List
[email protected]
https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev

Reply via email to