On 4 October 2016 at 12:02, Oliver Lietz wrote:
> On Tuesday 04 October 2016 11:24:38 Ian Boston wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I have tried many times to use Pax Exam, and always got stuck in its
> > complexity and opacity, this time was no different, hence why I resorted
> to
> > the crankstart provisionin
On Tuesday 04 October 2016 11:24:38 Ian Boston wrote:
> Hi,
> I have tried many times to use Pax Exam, and always got stuck in its
> complexity and opacity, this time was no different, hence why I resorted to
> the crankstart provisioning model. Obviously your mileage varies, but
> thanks for the p
Hi,
I have tried many times to use Pax Exam, and always got stuck in its
complexity and opacity, this time was no different, hence why I resorted to
the crankstart provisioning model. Obviously your mileage varies, but
thanks for the pointer. The feature.xml looks extensive at 557 lines
compared to
On Tuesday 04 October 2016 10:19:06 Ian Boston wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Ian,
> On 3 October 2016 at 11:37, Robert Munteanu wrote:
> > On Wed, 2016-09-28 at 21:37 +, Stefan Seifert wrote:
> > > the launchpad should be split up in separates features/provisioning
> > > fragments to make it possible to e
Hi,
On 3 October 2016 at 11:37, Robert Munteanu wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-09-28 at 21:37 +, Stefan Seifert wrote:
> > the launchpad should be split up in separates features/provisioning
> > fragments to make it possible to easily build a "minimal launchpad"
> > or "minimal launchpad + X" by sele
On Wed, 2016-09-28 at 21:37 +, Stefan Seifert wrote:
> the launchpad should be split up in separates features/provisioning
> fragments to make it possible to easily build a "minimal launchpad"
> or "minimal launchpad + X" by selection only some but not all
> features.
+1, this would be very us
On Saturday 01 October 2016 11:34:48 Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> Oliver Lietz wrote
>
> > On Friday 30 September 2016 14:00:23 Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> >> Atm the provisioning model has a slightly larger function set as karaf
> >> features. We have support for framework properties and things like t
Oliver Lietz wrote
> On Friday 30 September 2016 14:00:23 Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>> Atm the provisioning model has a slightly larger function set as karaf
>> features. We have support for framework properties and things like the
>> repo init stuff.
>
> I didn't find the statement in the OSGi spe
On Friday 30 September 2016 14:00:23 Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> Stefan Seifert wrote
>
> > discussed at the Sling Committer Round Table @ adaptTo() 2016
> >
> > currently we have Slind launchpad with a quite monolithic configuration
> > [1] one big list of all sling bundles), and we have a karaf f
On Friday 30 September 2016 14:00:23 Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> Stefan Seifert wrote
>
> > discussed at the Sling Committer Round Table @ adaptTo() 2016
> >
> > currently we have Slind launchpad with a quite monolithic configuration
> > [1] one big list of all sling bundles), and we have a karaf f
>This all leads me to the suggestion that we keep the provisioning model
>and generate the karaf features xml out of this. As the provisioning
>model supports features already we can directly create the features in
>the launchpad provisioning model as they are currently defined for karaf.
+1
ste
Stefan Seifert wrote
> discussed at the Sling Committer Round Table @ adaptTo() 2016
>
> currently we have Slind launchpad with a quite monolithic configuration [1]
> one big list of all sling bundles), and we have a karaf feature repository
> [2] with nicely cut features for different aspects o
12 matches
Mail list logo
