Just a quick input below, will add on later... Sounds great and workable too. If we can run down the the high level points that we may need to accomplish, i can take the ownership and start working(or rather handed over to me by Guillaume).
Currently getting into the depths of OSGi and a bit CXF so would be an added advantage. take care Santosh R. Dubey On 9/20/07, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'd rather have someone handle it. > I've done quite a lot of OSGification of jars this week (smx 4, camel, > activemq) and it's quite simple. The only problem as someone noticed > is that OSGi deals with packages, not only jars. And one package is > not really supposed to be exported by several bundles. Thus it > requires some work to avoid a single package being used in different > jars. Once this is done, adding the OSGi manifest entries is quite > easy. It then requires someone with a deep knowledge of the code to > mark some imports as optionals when neeeded. > > So once the refactoring is done, i'd be happy to help OSGifying CXF :-) > > On 9/20/07, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thursday 20 September 2007, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > > > Btw, what's the plan for OSGifying CXF ? > > > I've read it was planned for 2.1, but it seems it has not been done > > > yet. > > > > That's the point. It's on the roadmap for 2.1, but it's not done yet. > > You volunteering? :-) Seriously, 2.1 is in VERY > > early "investigative" stages (we're still trying to get 2.0.2 out the > > door) so at this point, the roadmap is fairly high level with a lot of > > details yet to be flushed out. > > > > Dan > > > > > > > On 9/20/07, Tully, Gary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > When looking at CXF from an OSGi bundle perspective the duplication > > > > of packages between api and implementation limits the modularity. > > > > Both interface and implementation are available to dependants by > > > > default. > > > > > > > > Would we consider adding an .impl to the implementation package > > > > names in CXF. > > > > > > > > org.apache.cxf.interceptor.Inerceptor > > > > org.apache.cxf.interceptor.impl.BareInInterceptor > > > > > > > > This would help Message.properties also. > > > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Gary. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Sent: 20 September 2007 01:48 > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Cc: Christian Schneider > > > > > Subject: Re: Architecture of cxf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We have a few places where package names exist in both the API jar > > > > > as well as in the rt-* jars. This may be causing some issues > > > > > with the analysis. They CERTAINLY have caused issues with the > > > > > i18n stuff as grabbing the Message.properties seems to grab > > > > > whichever is in the > > > > > classpath first. Definitely something I'd like to see cleaned > > > > > up. > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday 19 September 2007, Christian Schneider wrote: > > > > > > I have done a second try at displaying the architecture. > > > > > > > > > > This time I > > > > > > > > > > > only included the cxf-rt* jars in the model. > > > > > > This looks much better already ;-) Any idea why inlcuding the > > > > > > other jars especially the api jar gave me so many cycles? > > > > > > > > > > > > This architecture view below shows only some cycles. > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards > > > > > > > > > > > > Christian Schneider > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > J. Daniel Kulp > > > > > Principal Engineer > > > > > IONA > > > > > P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194 > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > http://www.dankulp.com/blog > > > > > > > > ---------------------------- > > > > IONA Technologies PLC (registered in Ireland) > > > > Registered Number: 171387 > > > > Registered Address: The IONA Building, Shelbourne Road, Dublin 4, > > > > Ireland > > > > > > > > -- > > J. Daniel Kulp > > Principal Engineer > > IONA > > P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.dankulp.com/blog > > > > > -- > Cheers, > Guillaume Nodet > ------------------------ > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ >
