My apologies if this has been discussed before, but what is the thinking on
the shared lib on Geronimo 3.0? As Geronimo moves to the OSGi based
infrastructure, will it make it into G 3.0? If so, how would it be exposed
in terms of classloading? Thanks...
Sangjin
On Mar 24, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote:
My apologies if this has been discussed before, but what is the
thinking on the shared lib on Geronimo 3.0? As Geronimo moves to the
OSGi based infrastructure, will it make it into G 3.0? If so, how
would it be exposed in terms
, David Jencks david_jen...@yahoo.comwrote:
On Mar 24, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote:
My apologies if this has been discussed before, but what is the thinking
on the shared lib on Geronimo 3.0? As Geronimo moves to the OSGi based
infrastructure, will it make it into G 3.0? If so, how
:
On Mar 24, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote:
My apologies if this has been discussed before, but what is the thinking on
the shared lib on Geronimo 3.0? As Geronimo moves to the OSGi based
infrastructure, will it make it into G 3.0? If so, how would it be exposed in
terms
On Mar 24, 2010, at 4:57 PM, David Jencks wrote:
On Mar 24, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote:
Thanks. So it sounds like it will be pretty much a *requirement* that
applications on 3.0 need to be fully OSGi bundles,
Well, the idea is that the geronimo deployment process will turn
On Mar 24, 2010, at 2:10 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
On Mar 24, 2010, at 4:57 PM, David Jencks wrote:
On Mar 24, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote:
Thanks. So it sounds like it will be pretty much a *requirement* that
applications on 3.0 need to be fully OSGi bundles,
Well, the
I wholeheartedly agree that if you're going to be in the OSGi runtime the
shared lib approach doesn't make sense. You would be denying yourself all
the benefits that OSGi brings in terms of classloading and flexibility.
I just wanted to be clear that at a high level in 3.0 OSGi is not only a
On Mar 24, 2010, at 5:30 PM, David Jencks wrote:
While I always thought shared lib was a bad idea, at least pre-osgi the
concept of a classloader that you could just toss things in made sense. I
don't think it makes any sense in osgi. There is no dynamic-export header so
whatever
