Hi,
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Minto van der Sluis <[email protected]> wrote: > > Currently we create our launchers using the maven assembly plugin. > > > > I see the following advantages of our approach: > > - Version of artifacts using maven mechanism (dependency management, IDE > > support) > > - Mvn URIs for bundle allowing easy updates from maven repo > I am not sure if I fully understand this one. Karaf features also use > mvn URIs. Karaf's features.xml can also be used in conjuction with > resource filtering. Like this the dependency management can still be > done in maven pom files. > This is an advantage comparend with the sling-launcher in which the bundles has some slinginstall:... URIs. I think in karaf bundles (not just features) can have mvn-uris too. > > > > And disadvantages: > > - It's not possible to have list of the bundles for particular features > > - configuration quite hard > > > > An alternative would be the sling launchpad plugin > > Advantages: > > - Partial bundle lists to group features > > - Used in Stanbol and Sling allowing to mix and match partial bundlelists > > with these projects > > > > Disadvantages > > - unresolvable sling-uris for bundles > > - propertary bundlelist format not offering the same comfort as maven > > dependencies > > > > Yet another approach would be to create a launcher using Karaf > > Advantages: > > - Integrates with many karaf based applications > > - Karaf feature sets can be created from maven dependencies > > - Features can be added at runtime > > > > Disadvantages: > > - A Karaf distribution is not a self-executable jar > Is this really that important? In my case it is not. > I don't think it's very important but it is an advantage. > > For my project I created a karaf distributions that needs to be > configured after deployment. The most important configuration item is > the location of the triplestore. I wouldn't want this to be the default > value since it would make upgrading forget about the contents of the > triplestore. > While I'll agree it should be easily configurable I also think double-click and run is a great way to getting people started quickly. Of course unzipping Isn't a very high bar. > > - Compatibility issues to investigate, notably with regards of > > authentication/JAAS policy and the clerezza shell > My Karaf distribution also partly uses Clerezza. Attached you can find > the Clerezza features.xml that I have created. > > I have to admit that I like the Karaf eco-system with support for > clustering (Karaf Cellar) that I will most probably be using in the > coming weeks. > Having clerezza features readily available in the karaf ecosystem would be certainly an advantage. And then we could see how well a ful clerezza distribution can be created with these features. I suggest to create svn folders: - provisioning/sling - provisioning/karaf with partialbundlelists respective features. Ideally we could then later get the karaf-maven-plugin to produce partial bundlelists too or unify the things in another way. But given the usage of clerezza features both in a sling-launcher as well as in a karaf environment I think it makes sense to provide both. Cheers, Reto > > > > > Just what came to my mind, thoughts would be greatly appreciated. > > > > Cheers, > > Reto > >
