Hi, I don't think Robert (or anyone else) is saying that there *shouldn't* be a Spring Boot-based distribution which uses Oak. But the Jackrabbit project wouldn't necessarily be the right place for this.
Regards, Justin On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 10:08 AM Clay Ferguson <[email protected]> wrote: > Robert, > Not to turn this email list into a theoretical discussion, but I'll say > one thing, and then we can carry on the conversation privately or in > different forum... > > I think *the* primary reason OSGi has a place in the world, is because it > can make completely incompatible set of things be able to run together. For > example, if I have component A that requires version B of of some specific > class but perhaps B is using an older component C than the version of C > that A is using internally...then a single classpath cannot ever work. You > must have an environment which gives each component it's own "world (i.e. > separate classpath)" or environment to run in. > > What SpringBoot is all about, on the other hand, is saying let's design a > single set of dependencies (Technology Stack) that are all *known* to work > together (single classloader) on the same versions of all dependencies in > the chain, and eliminate the version conflicting before it starts, thus > eliminating *one of* the problems OSGi solves. So OSGi is great, but unless > I run directly into one of the problems it solves, I don't need it. Spring > already has "Spring Data MongoDB" and "Spring Data Solr" projects, and I > think there should be a "Spring Data JCR" project also, that is basically > JackrabbitOak packaged similarly to how I do it in meta64.com. That is, > basically Oak dependencies, with a thin layer of spring beans exposing it, > and a bit of AOP for session management, etc. > > My apologies if this is an inappropriate forum for such a discussion. > > Best regards, > Clay Ferguson > [email protected] > > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Robert Munteanu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Clay Ferguson <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I looked at that readme page (oak-pojosr). I like the idea of >> simplifying >> > use of osgi, or embedding it. It reminds me a bit of how SpringBoot >> actually >> > embeds an instance of Tomcat, so deployment is simple and easy for web >> apps. >> > >> > Having a totally prepackaged way of doing stuff is what most developers >> want >> > these days. There are just too many moving parts in most large systems, >> so >> > people need "prepackaged" configurations that just work right out of the >> > box, at least for some minimal set of the most common usage patterns. >> I'm >> > not sure if there's any plans to integrate into SpringBoot, but IMO that >> > would be a hugely important thing for the industry if Oak was part of >> > SpringBoot stack. >> >> I'm not an Oak developer, so don't take this as any sort of official >> statement, but the way I understand it the Jackrabbit project only >> provides the Oak code / binaries ; packaging it in suitable formats >> for development / deployment is left to packagers / other projects. >> >> One such example is Apache Sling ( https://sling.apache.org ), a >> framework built on top of JCR, REST and OSGi. But if you're >> well-versed in Spring and convinced that you should switch to OSGi it >> won't help you much. In that case "someone" ( it's always someone else >> :-) ) should provide that integration. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Robert >> -- >> Sent from my (old) compute >> > >
