Hi, This is probably slightly off topic, as below seems to be focused on maven / build stuff... I have a demonstration, which I could provide the eclipse project/workspace if anyone is interested, of a tomcat web app that embeds felix... The idea was a bit more decoupling than what most attempts have tried, from what I've seen... My tenants were: A). Tomcat has no idea that embedded OSGi ('er, felix as the equinox has a NPE bug in it, for which I logged a bugzilla report) is occurring, and B). the embedded OSGi (bundles and services thereof) have no idea that they are in a web app (tomcat or otherwise); After all, OSGi is loose coupling taken to another stratosphere (for which I am not complaining in the least, certainly pleased with the mentality/mind-set), and thus the embedding of which should also be loosely coupled; Now, with the loose coupling mantra said, I still had to modify the bootdelegation line to include my embedded services API, but that was acceptable to me -- So, the trick was to have a small piece of glue code that takes the web app request(s) and translates to an embedded bundle service a la the API -- hence, if the API changes, my glue code would need to change -- so, the bootdelegation entry didn't bother me; I have a few ideas to make my embedded API in a "meta model" scheme, at which point the API would barely need to change.... but I leave that to your imagination... One big thing I've always liked about OSGi (and Felix even better): minimal agenda (like the "Lego" analogy); I don't get that mentality from Sun or even other implementations (and, don't get me started on J-7); Well, thought I'd throw that out there, sort of related fodder to embedding and web apps... Craig Phillips, Praxis
________________________________ From: Richard S. Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wed 10/8/2008 9:27 AM To: dev@felix.apache.org Subject: [Fwd: Re: building a felix embedding web app with maven] I guess servlet gets dragged into the framework dependencies from compendium. Should we put excluding servlet in our own POMs? Would it excluding it in the framework POM be sufficient? -> richard -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: building a felix embedding web app with maven Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2008 17:08:49 +0800 From: Stuart McCulloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008/10/8 Maxim Suponya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Hi, > I have a web app that is built using maven 2.0.8. The application's > pom.xml contains following dependency: > > <dependency> > <groupId>org.apache.felix</groupId> > <artifactId>org.apache.felix.framework</artifactId> > <version>1.2.1</version> > </dependency> > > But felix, in turn, depends on a project defined in > javax.servlet-1.0.0.pom which subsequently makes a jar file called > javax.servlet-1.0.0.jar ending up in WEB-INF/lib together with > org.apache.felix.framework-1.2.1.jar. have you tried using: <dependency> <groupId>org.apache.felix</groupId> <artifactId>org.apache.felix.framework</artifactId> <version>1.2.1</version> <exclusions> <exclusion> <groupId>org.apache.felix</groupId> <artifactId>javax.servlet</artifactId> </exclusion> </exclusions> </dependency> to tell Maven to exclude the transitive servlet dependency? > When the web application starts and the servlet that launches felix gets > initialized, a ClassCastException is thrown saying that this servlet is > not a Servlet.. this is due to presence of javax.servlet-1.0.0.jar with > Servlet.class in WEB-INF/lib which comes in conflict with the one that's > provided by Tomcat. > > Adding <scope>provided</scope> in my app's pom.xml doesn't make any > difference. > > <dependency> > <groupId>org.apache.felix</groupId> > <artifactId>javax.servlet</artifactId> > <version>1.0.0</version> > <scope>provided</scope> > </dependency> > > Is there any way around this? > > Thanks a lot, > > Maxim > > - ---------------- > IMPORTANT NOTICE : The information in this email is confidential and may > also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, any use or > dissemination of the information and any disclosure or copying of this email > is unauthorised and strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in > error, please promptly inform us by reply email or telephone. You should > also delete this email and destroy any hard copies produced. -- Cheers, Stuart