Sandbox OSGi runtime
Hi all, what do you think of a uimaj module similar to uimaj-ep-runtime just for sandbox components (something like sanxbox-osgi-runtime)? This is useful when you want to use Sandbox components in an OSGi environment. Cheers. Tommaso
Re: Sandbox OSGi runtime
would it make sense to have individual osgi packaging of sandbox annotators? (I'm assuming you're thinking about annotators, not about other things, right?) -Marshall On 3/3/2010 9:03 AM, Tommaso Teofili wrote: > Hi all, > what do you think of a uimaj module similar to uimaj-ep-runtime just for > sandbox components (something like sanxbox-osgi-runtime)? > This is useful when you want to use Sandbox components in an OSGi > environment. > Cheers. > Tommaso > >
Re: Sandbox OSGi runtime
Hi Marshall 2010/3/3 Marshall Schor > would it make sense to have individual osgi packaging of sandbox > annotators? > Do you mean you prefer not to have a single module aggregating all annotators in a single bundle and you'd prefer each annotator having its own individual OSGi bundle? > > (I'm assuming you're thinking about annotators, not about other things, > right?) > Yes, right. Cheers. Tommaso
Re: Sandbox OSGi runtime
Tommaso Teofili wrote: Hi all, what do you think of a uimaj module similar to uimaj-ep-runtime just for sandbox components (something like sanxbox-osgi-runtime)? This is useful when you want to use Sandbox components in an OSGi environment. Not sure how this can be done, since UIMA must be able to load the AEs from an OSGi bundle, but then we have all the issues we discussed a while back. http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-uima-dev/201001.mbox/ Jörn
Re: Sandbox OSGi runtime
On 3/4/2010 3:00 AM, Tommaso Teofili wrote: > Hi Marshall > > 2010/3/3 Marshall Schor > > >> would it make sense to have individual osgi packaging of sandbox >> annotators? >> >> > Do you mean you prefer not to have a single module aggregating all > annotators in a single bundle and you'd prefer each annotator having its own > individual OSGi bundle? > Yes. Some of the annotators have very large (could be 100's of megabytes, for instance) statistical models. -Marshall > > >> (I'm assuming you're thinking about annotators, not about other things, >> right?) >> >> > Yes, right. > > Cheers. > Tommaso > >
Re: Sandbox OSGi runtime
2010/3/6 Marshall Schor > > > On 3/4/2010 3:00 AM, Tommaso Teofili wrote: > > Hi Marshall > > > > 2010/3/3 Marshall Schor > > > > > >> would it make sense to have individual osgi packaging of sandbox > >> annotators? > >> > >> > > Do you mean you prefer not to have a single module aggregating all > > annotators in a single bundle and you'd prefer each annotator having its > own > > individual OSGi bundle? > > > > Yes. Some of the annotators have very large (could be 100's of > megabytes, for instance) statistical models. > I just made myself a multi module Maven project containing one module for each of the Sandbox annotators so that one can select which annotators to install on an OSGi runtime but at the same time they are tied together inside a unique project. Each module contains only the POM which uses the Maven Felix plugin to produce the annotator bundle (more or less like in uimaj-ep-runtime). I am doing some tests with this approach using some of these bundled annotators with Apache Clerezza. Tommaso
Re: Sandbox OSGi runtime
Back again, 2010/3/10 Tommaso Teofili > > I am doing some tests with this approach using some of these bundled > annotators with Apache Clerezza. > > Tests seem to go well using OpenCalaisAnnotator and AlchemyAPIAnnotator bundles generated with Maven Felix plugin. I've temporarily put the POMs on a GC SVN [1] so that you can view and comment this approach. What do you think? Cheers, Tommaso [1] : http://code.google.com/p/osgi-uima-sandbox/source/browse/#svn/trunk/osgi-uima-sandbox
Re: Sandbox OSGi runtime
Seems like a reasonable approach (caveat: I'm not really up-to-date with the use-cases). Is it possible to factor out any (i.e., most) of the felix bundle plugin configuration into the parent pom? -Marshall On 3/25/2010 4:17 AM, Tommaso Teofili wrote: > Back again, > > 2010/3/10 Tommaso Teofili > >> I am doing some tests with this approach using some of these bundled >> annotators with Apache Clerezza. >> >> >> > Tests seem to go well using OpenCalaisAnnotator and AlchemyAPIAnnotator > bundles generated with Maven Felix plugin. > I've temporarily put the POMs on a GC SVN [1] so that you can view and > comment this approach. > What do you think? > > Cheers, > Tommaso > > [1] : > http://code.google.com/p/osgi-uima-sandbox/source/browse/#svn/trunk/osgi-uima-sandbox > >
Re: Sandbox OSGi runtime
2010/3/25 Marshall Schor
> Seems like a reasonable approach (caveat: I'm not really up-to-date with
> the use-cases).
>
> Is it possible to factor out any (i.e., most) of the felix bundle plugin
> configuration into the parent pom?
Good point Marshall.
I tried to do so but it seems the tag cannot be defined
partially (something on the parent POM and something else inside the child
POM) so I thought using Maven properties could be a solution in order to
define some fixed values for inside the parent POM.
Parent POM:
org.apache.uima,*
*;scope=compile;inline=true
singleton:=true
J2SE-1.5
true
registered
true
META-INF
Inside the child POM only Export-package and Bundle-SymbolicName are
defined:
...
${manifest-location}
<_nouses>${nouses}
org.apache.uima.lucas.*
${import-package}
${embed-dependency}
org.apache.uima.lucas;${singleton}
${jre}
${ext-api}
${buddy-policy}
..
Waiting for your comments about it.
Tommaso
P.S.:
In Apache Clerezza the AlchemyAPI and OpenCalais annotators are used at this
moment to enable auto tagging of resources.
Re: Sandbox OSGi runtime
On 4/3/2010 5:14 AM, Tommaso Teofili wrote:
> 2010/3/25 Marshall Schor
>
>
>> Seems like a reasonable approach (caveat: I'm not really up-to-date with
>> the use-cases).
>>
>> Is it possible to factor out any (i.e., most) of the felix bundle plugin
>> configuration into the parent pom?
>>
>
> Good point Marshall.
> I tried to do so but it seems the tag cannot be defined
> partially (something on the parent POM and something else inside the child
> POM)
hmm, not sure why this didn't work for you. I was able to get something
like this to work:
I set up a trial set of poms - a parent and a child.
In the parent I put the items that I wanted to be inherited in a
element:
org.apache.felix
maven-bundle-plugin
1.4.0
true
META-INF
<_nouses>true
org.apache.uima,*
*;scope=compile;inline=true
org.apache.uima.bsf;singleton:=true
J2SE-1.5
true
registered
In the child I put the items that were specific to that one child:
org.apache.uima.bsf_${uimaj-release-eclipse-version}
org.apache.felix
maven-bundle-plugin
org.apache.uima.annotator.bsf.*
org.apache.uima.bsf;${singleton}
Then, when I did mvn help:effective-pom on the child it showed that the
parent configuration was successfully merged with the child result:
org.apache.felix
maven-bundle-plugin
1.4.0
true
org.apache.uima.annotator.bsf.*
org.apache.uima.bsf;${singleton}
<_nouses>true
org.apache.uima,*
*;scope=compile;inline=true
J2SE-1.5
true
registered
META-INF
> so I thought using Maven properties could be a solution in order to
> define some fixed values for inside the parent POM.
>
> Parent POM:
>
> org.apache.uima,*
> *;scope=compile;inline=true
> singleton:=true
> J2SE-1.5
> true
> registered
> true
> META-INF
>
>
> Inside the child POM only Export-package and Bundle-SymbolicName are
> defined:
> ...
>
> ${manifest-location}
>
> <_nouses>${nouses}
> org.apache.uima.lucas.*
> ${import-package}
> ${embed-dependency}
>
> org.apache.uima.lucas;${singleton}
>
>
> ${jre}
> ${ext-api}
> ${buddy-policy}
>
>
> ..
>
> Waiting for your comments about it.
> Tommaso
>
> P.S.:
> In Apache Clerezza the AlchemyAPI and OpenCalais annotators are used at this
> moment to enable auto tagging of resources.
>
Great! :-)
-Marshall
Re: Sandbox OSGi runtime
It seems I missed something with the previous configuration. Modifying POMs using your approach everything is still working and better looking. Thanks very much Marshall. What do you think of creating the sandbox-osgi-runtime (multi-module) project on the Sandbox so that everyone can use such generated bundles? Happy Easter to everyone. Tommaso
Re: Sandbox OSGi runtime
On 4/4/2010 5:32 AM, Tommaso Teofili wrote: > It seems I missed something with the previous configuration. > Modifying POMs using your approach everything is still working and better > looking. > Thanks very much Marshall. > What do you think of creating the sandbox-osgi-runtime (multi-module) > project on the Sandbox so that everyone can use such generated bundles? > +1. I think there is a (slowly?) growing interest in OSGi - see, for instance, the latest info in the apache felix project [1] and in particular, the newer, possibly unreleased subprojects [2]. There are efforts there in the Apache Felix Commons subproject [3] to do more or less what you are trying to do here - it would be good to confirm these approaches are aligned :-). -Marshall > Happy Easter to everyone. > Tommaso > > [1] http://felix.apache.org/site/index.html [2] http://felix.apache.org/site/subprojects.html [3] http://felix.apache.org/site/apache-felix-commons.html
Re: Sandbox OSGi runtime
Nice one! It seems a nice effort from the Felix community and it looks like it's perfectly aligned with what we are trying to do (a POM with a dependency on the library to bundle and the Maven Felix plugin for the configuration of the bundle), so we may choose one of two ways: contribute such POMs to Felix Commons (but we'd need to change the group-id to org.apache.felix.commons) or have them deployed inside our SVN and "linked" (having UIMA listed as one of the supporting libraries) to the Felix Commons project. Since we already have OSGi versions of core framework inside our SVN to support Eclipse plugins we may go for the second option. So if we agree I could start a thread on Felix ML to let them know about this effort. What do you think? Have a nice day. Tommaso 2010/4/4 Marshall Schor > > > +1. I think there is a (slowly?) growing interest in OSGi - see, for > instance, the latest info in the apache felix project [1] and in > particular, the newer, possibly unreleased subprojects [2]. There are > efforts there in the Apache Felix Commons subproject [3] to do more or > less what you are trying to do here - it would be good to confirm these > approaches are aligned :-). > > -Marshall > > [1] http://felix.apache.org/site/index.html > [2] http://felix.apache.org/site/subprojects.html > [3] http://felix.apache.org/site/apache-felix-commons.html >
