Yeah, I was considering that. Using the OSGi ranking attribute on services should be sufficient in order to keep them ordered.
And checking the 'jar' extension would clearly remove most of the bad situations for that case. On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 05:24, Andreas Pieber <[email protected]> wrote: > I also think so. We "simply" have to add the ability to order deployer. > This way > we can savely exclude such situation as "all of them having the same > ending". > > kind regards, > andreas > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 01:15:56PM +0000, Adrian Trenaman wrote: > > I think I'd go with it like this: > > > > If we detect a file in the deploy/ directory with the extension > > '.jar', AND the JAR's manifest does NOT contain any OSGi headers, > > THEN we assume that it's a plain-old-jar, and perform an auto-wrap. > > > > Sounds pretty safe (and very usable!) to me, no? > > > > On 11/01/2011 13:04, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > > >That could be a good idea, but I'm not sure how to identify soemthing by > the > > >negative without screwing the whole thing. > > >I mean a war is a jar too, a kar is a zip file, a jbi archive is also a > zip > > >file. It would be a bit of a catch-everything, so I'm not really sure > if > > >that would work well. > > > > > >On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 01:51, Adrian Trenaman<[email protected] > >wrote: > > > > > >>Hmmm. > > >> > > >>I think I recall Guillaume saying that you could achieve this by just > > >>dropping them into a lib/ext directory? > > >> > > >>However, I prefer the idea of a 'Jar' deployer: if you drop a plain JAR > > >>into the deploy directory, then it should depoy using wrap (and making > all > > >>dependencies marked for optional resolution to assist ease of use). > > >> > > >>Best, > > >>Ade. > > >> > > >> > > >>On 10/01/2011 21:46, Charles Moulliard wrote: > > >> > > >>>Hi, > > >>> > > >>>I would like to know if we have a property that we can setup to > > >>>register additional jar librairies (defined in a client folder > > >>>directory) like we do for JRE runtime libraries and expose them as > > >>>packages ? If this is not the case, could the hot "deploy" folder be > > >>>the alternative ? > > >>> > > >>>Regards, > > >>> > > >>>Charles Moulliard > > >>> > > >>>Sr. Principal Solution Architect - FuseSource > > >>>Apache Committer > > >>> > > >>>Blog : http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com > > >>>Twitter : http://twitter.com/cmoulliard > > >>>Linkedin : http://www.linkedin.com/in/charlesmoulliard > > >>>Skype: cmoulliard > > >>> > > >>-- > > >>Adrian Trenaman, Sr. Principal Solution Architect > > >>FuseSource > > >>Phone: +353-86-6051026 > > >>Email: [email protected] > > >>Web: http://trenaman.blogspot.com, http://fusesource.com > > >>Twitter: adrian_trenaman > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > -- > > Adrian Trenaman, Sr. Principal Solution Architect > > FuseSource > > Phone: +353-86-6051026 > > Email: [email protected] > > Web: http://trenaman.blogspot.com, http://fusesource.com > > Twitter: adrian_trenaman > > > -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ ------------------------ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
