Hi, I agree with both of you, start-levels should be avoided. However, in this case, the application is defined with a Spring XML using Camel routes, so no Java beans are present in the bundle. The application must wait until the Camel namespace is properly registered in the camel-spring OSGi activator. The namespace must be available before the Spring XML file is parsed (which constructs the Spring bean definitions). This cannot be done with a "osgi:reference" nor a "depends-on" dependency, because they happen too late. Start levels are not reliable on the first start-up, but they are reliable for the next start-ups. Only a programmatic call in an OSGi activator for the application can wait for the camel-spring bundle be fully activated, but it is a bit cumbersome.
Regards, metatech Start-level can't really be trusted, especially if you use blueprint for example, which does actually start the blueprint stuff asynchronously. On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 15:49, Donald Whytock <dwhytock@> wrote: > It may be a matter of personal taste, but I disagree with reliance on > start levels. It should be more reliable to use a BundleListener to > track whether a particular bundle has loaded, or a ServiceTracker with > the bundle being watched for launching a "here I am" service when > initialization is complete. > > Don > -- View this message in context: http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Camel-under-OSGi-without-Spring-et-al-tp4507473p5160645.html Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
