Emily, That sounds reasonable to me. Will you add this to your documentation-to-do list?
Regards, Mark On 17 November 2010 10:31, Emily Jiang <[email protected]> wrote: > Based on Jarek's comments, we can make the provisioning against local > runtime configurable via a system variable, > "provision.exclude.local.repository". The default behaviour is that we > provision EBA applications against the local runtimes (apache aries default > behaviour) unless the system variable is set to true. In this way, any > application servers can set this system variable to 'true' in their > environment if they want to change the default behaviour. We won't need to > change apache aries default behaviour. > > What do people think? > > Thanks > Emily > > > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Jarek Gawor <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Emily, >> >> Maybe I misunderstood what you meant in your original email but here's >> what I'm thinking of. If I install some eba that has logging api >> dependencies and my rumtime provides logging api I want the eba to use >> the logging api provided by the runtime. >> >> Jarek >> >> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Emily Jiang <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Hi Jarek, >> > >> > Alasdair was correct that this was not related to isolation and it was >> our >> > policy on provisioning. >> > >> > Are you happy with the suggestion of choosing not to provision against >> local >> > platform repositories (runtime jars)? >> > >> > Thanks >> > Emily >> > >> > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Alasdair Nottingham <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> Hi, not sure what this has to do with isolation. >> >> >> >> Alasdair >> >> >> >> On 15 Nov 2010, at 16:13, Jarek Gawor <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > I think we should keep the current behavior and make it configurable. >> >> > Not all environments support isolation. >> >> > >> >> > Jarek >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Emily Jiang < >> [email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> A month ago, I raised a question about disabling resolving an >> >> application >> >> >> against local platform repository (runtime bundles). No one seems to >> >> object >> >> >> the idea. I will go ahead to make the changes tomorrow not to >> provision >> >> >> against the runtime bundles when provisioning an EBA application. If >> you >> >> >> have any different opinion, please shout now. >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> >> Emily >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> >> >> From: Emily Jiang <[email protected]> >> >> >> Date: 15 October 2010 14:23 >> >> >> Subject: [Discussion] resolving against local platform repository >> >> >> To: [email protected] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> At the moment, our aries resolver resolves eba files against local >> >> >> platform repositories, which means that customer bundles will be able >> to >> >> >> import packages exported by our runtime bundles, such as >> >> >> org.apache.aries.application.api_0.3.0.incubating-SNAPSHOT. Ideally, >> we >> >> >> should not allow customer bundles depend on our runtime bundles, >> which >> >> >> should be private to our own runtime framework. I think not many ( or >> >> even >> >> >> none:o) App Server would like to expose their internal to customer >> >> >> bundles. Any objections for excluding the local runtime bundles when >> we >> >> >> perform provisioning? >> >> >> >> >> >> If we do decide to keep the current behaviour, we should give an >> option >> >> to >> >> >> the app servers to alter this behaviour (e.g. make their runtime >> bundles >> >> >> invisible to provisioner). Thoughts? >> >> >> >> >> >> Below are the subset of the runtime bundles for setting up itests: >> >> >> {1=org.ops4j.pax.exam_1.2.0 [1], >> >> >> 2=org.ops4j.pax.exam.junit.extender_1.2.0 [2], >> >> >> 3=org.ops4j.pax.exam.junit.extender.impl_1.2.0 [3], >> >> >> 4=wrap_mvn_org.ops4j.pax.exam_pax-exam-junit_1.2.0_0.0.0 [4], >> >> >> 5=org.ops4j.pax.logging.pax-logging-api_1.4.0 [5], >> >> >> 6=org.ops4j.pax.logging.pax-logging-service_1.4.0 [6], >> >> >> 7=org.apache.felix.configadmin_1.2.4 [7], >> >> >> 8=org.ops4j.pax.url.mvn_1.1.2 [8], >> >> >> 9=org.apache.aries.application.api_0.3.0.incubating-SNAPSHOT [9], >> >> >> 10=org.apache.aries.application.utils_0.3.0.incubating-SNAPSHOT >> [10], >> >> >> 11=org.apache.aries.application.management_0.3.0.incubating-SNAPSHOT >> >> >> [11], >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 12=org.apache.aries.application.default.local.platform_0.3.0.incubating-SNAPSHOT >> >> >> [12], >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 13=org.apache.aries.application.noop.platform.repo_0.3.0.incubating-SNAPSHOT >> >> >> [13], >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 14=org.apache.aries.application.noop.postresolve.process_0.3.0.incubating-SNAPSHOT >> >> >> [14], >> >> >> 15=org.apache.aries.application.runtime_0.3.0.incubating-SNAPSHOT >> [15], >> >> >> >> 16=org.apache.aries.application.resolver.obr_0.3.0.incubating-SNAPSHOT >> >> >> [16], >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 17=org.apache.aries.application.deployment.management_0.3.0.incubating-SNAPSHOT >> >> >> [17], >> >> >> 18=org.apache.aries.application.modeller_0.3.0.incubating-SNAPSHOT >> >> [18], >> >> >> 19=org.apache.felix.bundlerepository_1.6.4 [19], >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 20=org.apache.aries.application.runtime.itest.interfaces_0.3.0.incubating-SNAPSHOT >> >> >> [20], >> >> >> 21=org.apache.aries.util_0.3.0.incubating-SNAPSHOT [21], >> >> >> 22=org.apache.aries.blueprint_0.3.0.incubating-SNAPSHOT [22], >> >> >> 23=osgi.cmpn_4.2.0.200908310645 [23], ....} >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Many thanks and kindest regards, >> >> >> Emily >> >> >> =========================== >> >> >> Emily Jiang >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Thanks >> >> >> Emily >> >> >> ================= >> >> >> Emily Jiang >> >> >> [email protected] >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Thanks >> > Emily >> > ================= >> > Emily Jiang >> > [email protected] >> > >> > > > > -- > Thanks > Emily > ================= > Emily Jiang > [email protected] >
