Hi Christian, +1 for that.
In that case, I would like something with API/Interface where I could donate/merge what I did in Cellar DOSGi. Then, I will remove the code from Cellar to use a feature from Aries.
Regards JB On 03/04/2016 05:16 PM, Christian Schneider wrote:
Sascha Vogt and Johannes Utzig started a discussion on karaf dev to find a way to implement a light weight DOSGi implemention (using RMI). See: http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/Proposal-Lightweight-standalone-remote-OSGi-implementation-for-karaf-cellar-td4045343.html After looking into the possible places to put this we found that the CXF-DOSGi code might provide a good starting point for it. As the code is coupled to CXF it needs some work of course. The discovery and topology manager parts are already nicely separated from CXF. Only the dsw-cxf module is tightly coupled to CXF. Unfortunately this part contains a big part of the remote services reference impl. So the idea is to split this module in the impl of RemoteServiceAdmin and into one or more modules for the CXF providers (WSDL, pojo, rest). I already started this to make sure it is possible. In the current master I refactored the code inside the module to decouple CXF and the spec parts. These packages implement the RemoteServiceAdmin spec part while the other packages implement the CXF providers. https://github.com/apache/cxf-dosgi/tree/master/dsw/cxf-dsw/src/main/java/org/apache/cxf/dosgi/dsw/api https://github.com/apache/cxf-dosgi/tree/master/dsw/cxf-dsw/src/main/java/org/apache/cxf/dosgi/dsw/service The idea is to use an API like this for providers: https://github.com/apache/cxf-dosgi/blob/master/dsw/cxf-dsw/src/main/java/org/apache/cxf/dosgi/dsw/api/DistributionProvider.java So a provider needs to be able to expose a service to the outside world and create a local proxy for a remote service. The main advantage of such an API compared to the RemoteServiceAdmin interface is that it is stateless. The provider just needs to create the endpoints and clients/proxies. It does not have to manage them. So it should be a lot easier to write new transports for the Remote Service Admin spec. So one point of discussion is if we want to create such an API for the public and how it should look like. The other point is that the CXF independent parts then would not have any dependency on CXF. So I think they would be better placed in Aries as they implement an OSGi spec. The CXF implementations for Soap and Rest providers would of course stay in CXF but might then be moved into the CXF main project to follow the changes and releases in CXF more closely. I have also started to discuss with Scott Lewis(Eclipse ECF) and Peter Kriens. They are quite positive about the API. Ideally it could be supported by Aries and ECF so providers could run in both implementations. Johannes even proposed that such an API could be part of a future remote services spec. What do you think? Christian
-- Jean-Baptiste Onofré [email protected] http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com
