I have started some stuff related to that too. The plan was to see if it's possible to implement RFC 124 on top of Felix iPojo. I have the apis, schemas and some of the parsing working ... If anyone is interested, we could maybe set up a lab for that.
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 19:23, Jarek Gawor <[email protected]> wrote: > Btw, I checked in under > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/sandbox/gawor/rfc124 a tiny > bit of code that I was playing around with to better understand RFC > 124. I'll keep on working and experimenting with it but anyone is > welcome to join. I'm planning to add some of the RFC 124 API > definitions next in order see what it would take to implement these > API. > > Jarek > > On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 6:47 AM, Rick McGuire <[email protected]> wrote: >> Davanum Srinivas wrote: >>> >>> Folks, >>> >>> Any interest in support for RFC 124, "A Component Model for OSGi"? >>> http://www.osgi.org/download/osgi-4.2-early-draft.pdf >>> >>> This is in addition to typical J2EE artifacts that we already support. >>> >>> thanks, >>> dims >>> >>> >> >> Time, I think, to give this thread a kick. >> There are lots of different aspects to this, so I think we should first make >> an attempt at deciding what the target goal is here. RFC 124 (aka, the >> "blueprint service") is inherently an OSGi thing, so first we need to >> address what it means to add OSGi to Geronimo. And, I think, in general, >> this really means "OSGi as a Geronimo application programming model". >> >> This can have multiple meanings. One approach, already under discussion in >> the "Whence Geronimo kernel?" thread would be rearchitect the Geronimo >> kernel around OSGi bundles and the OSGi classloading model. In this mode, >> an application model should be fairly simple to add, though there may be >> some issues of bridging between the OSGi "bundle world" and the JEE >> programming model. Additions like the blueprint service might be directly >> usable within the Geronimo kernel for assembly and injection. >> Another approach would be to add an OSGi application container to Geronimo. >> This would allow OSGi/blueprint-based applications to be hosted on >> Geronimo, and there may be some Geronimo services that get exposed to the >> apps, but the apps run in their own separate environment. >> The container approach is, I believe, probably the easier path, but we I >> think we lose a lot of the advantages of the OSGi model in other places. >> Also, OSGi is working on a number of additional RFCs that will add >> different JEE concepts to the platform. I'd hate to think that Geronimo >> might need to maintain two versions of each of these pieces, one for the >> OSGi container and one for the non-OSGi world. >> Anyway, I think regardless of the implementation approach, we need to start >> discussing this in terms of "what does it mean to host an OSGi application >> on Geronimo?". Here are a few questions that immediately come to mind: >> >> 1. How are applications deployed? Is there some higher-level deployment >> model than the bundle level? >> 2. What services are available Geronimo application environment? Blueprint >> is certainly one service, what others do we need? >> 3. How is the config-admin service managed? Do we need Geronimo console >> access and editting of config admin properties? >> 4. Are there any bridges from the OSGi world to the JEE world? For >> example, is is possible to export service registry instances to JNDI? >> >> I think this is a good starting point for discussing ideas....I'm sure there >> are additional questions that will come up in the discussions. >> >> Rick >> >> >> >> > -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ ------------------------ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
