Well no one hinders you to keep all your deps in the poms AND in the features.xml (but also no one forces you to do so). I'm still not convinced that this is a bad idea.
Kind regards, Andreas On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> wrote: > It's more than that. If you end up being offline or with no internet > access for example (and we have customers that need to build offline > for example), not having all dependencies as maven dependencies is > really a problem, as you can't rely on any tooling anymore to grab all > the dependencies. > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 11:30, Andreas Pieber <[email protected]> wrote: >> Well, but does it really matter if maven fails with: "artifact not >> found" or if the karaf-maven-plugin fails with "artifact not found"? >> >> Kind regards, >> Andreas >> >> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 09:33, Andreas Pieber <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 9:27 AM, David Jencks <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> 1. Supporters of the "don't need maven dependencies" idea almost had me >>>>> convinced for a while until I realized this would really be abusing >>>>> maven. It would be OK for an ant task where there's no expectation of >>>>> any structure, but one of the basic principles that makes maven work is >>>>> that the pom describes all the outside dependencies. Generally violating >>>>> this principal causes lots of unanticipated problems when you try to >>>>> reason about the broken pom downstream. >>>> >>>> I'm not with you here. You still have to define the versions >>>> somewhere; I see the features.xml more as an extension than an >>>> replacement. >>> >>> Yes, I agree, having all dependencies in maven ensure that your build >>> can be reproducible. I had problems with features that use >>> dependencies not available in any maven repository for example. That >>> make thing difficult to diagnose and work around. >>> >>>> >>>>> 2. The kar packaging already does a lot of things including extending an >>>>> existing features.xml (so you can have config properties etc) and >>>>> including arbitrary resources that get unpacked into the karaf server. I >>>>> think if there's documentation in a features.xml file it should be in >>>>> elements so it can be reasoned about and possibly displayed in the >>>>> console. I'm sure there are more things we can get it to do, and >>>>> specific examples would really help. >>>> >>>> But still, I have no problem if we allow both possibilities, but it >>>> should always be possible (imho) to create a kar file based on a >>>> features.xml >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> Andreas >>>> >>>>> >>>>> thanks >>>>> david jencks >>>>> >>>>> On Mar 1, 2011, at 11:52 PM, Adrian Trenaman wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Just to pitch in on this: I really like to write my own feature files >>>>>> for Karaf. Generally, I want to create one features file that pulls >>>>>> together artifacts from a whole set of projects, in a way that creates >>>>>> features as meaningful 'applications' that an ops guy can >>>>>> install/uninstall. While I appreciate that we could auto-generate the >>>>>> features file from a Maven POM, I prefer to *design* my features so that >>>>>> they're ergonomic. And, as has been mentioned earlier on this trail, >>>>>> hand-crafted features allow me to add config, documentation, etc. Any >>>>>> tooling we can write that helps the developer do this in an easy, no >>>>>> fuss way (and maybe spots any missing dependencies) should be preferred >>>>>> over a 'generate-from-Maven' approach, IMHO. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Ade >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: Andreas Pieber [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 02:33 AM >>>>>> To: [email protected] <[email protected]> >>>>>> Subject: Re: KAR feature not doing what the docs say it should >>>>>> >>>>>> Hey David >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:09 AM, David Jencks <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> I'm trying to understand why you want to maintain a features.xml by >>>>>>> hand so that the versions in it will differ from those in your maven >>>>>>> project rather than generating the features.xml from your maven project >>>>>>> so the versions will match up. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm not sure why they should? You can easily wire them together by >>>>>> filter the features.xml and use something like ${xyz.version} in your >>>>>> features.xml. In addition you do not always want to use the same >>>>>> artifacts as you reference in your pom. E.g. if you wrap Apache >>>>>> Wicket, you typically have one package with all deps, but in the src >>>>>> you really want to reference the single packages to help maven finding >>>>>> sources and jdoc. >>>>>> >>>>>>> I agree with KARAF-459 to the extent that if we keep the archive-kar >>>>>>> goal it should use more info from the supplied features.xml. I am >>>>>>> arguing that we should not keep it. Why is it a good idea to encourage >>>>>>> people to get their dependencies out of sync? >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't think that we encourage them to do so, but using the >>>>>> features.xml it is much easier to add config files, configurations, >>>>>> required features, other repositories... All of that have to be >>>>>> configured otherwise anyhow in the maven plugin and I think this will >>>>>> make it much more complex. >>>>>> >>>>>>> If you convince me this is a good idea :-) then I think making the kar >>>>>>> packaging so it can start with a (possibly partial) features.xml, add >>>>>>> maven dependencies to it, and put all the resulting dependencies into >>>>>>> the generated kar would be a good idea. I think this would solve >>>>>>> KARAF-459? >>>>>> >>>>>> I've tried ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> Kind regards, >>>>>> Andreas >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't know what the add-features-to-repo goal does yet so I'm not >>>>>>> sure if I think it's useful :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> thanks >>>>>>> david jencks >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mar 1, 2011, at 10:34 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm not sure to follow you. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The kar goal is exactly as the add-features-to-repo goal: you start >>>>>>>> from a features descriptor (that you wrote by hand) and the goal >>>>>>>> package the descriptor and the bundles/dependencies into a repo (kar >>>>>>>> or local). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 03/02/2011 07:34 AM, David Jencks wrote: >>>>>>>>> OK, but you are in a maven environment. You've now disconnected the >>>>>>>>> versions in the features.xml which you are presumably maintaining by >>>>>>>>> hand from those in your maven poms. I consider that a non-starter. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> My point is that you want to construct the features.xml from maven >>>>>>>>> dependencies in the first place. At the same time you can construct >>>>>>>>> the kar, including (some of) the dependencies. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> happy to be convinced otherwise... >>>>>>>>> thanks >>>>>>>>> david jencks >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mar 1, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The main advantage is that it starts from the features descriptor. >>>>>>>>>> So you simply define the features what you want to embed in the Kar >>>>>>>>>> and the plugin is responsible to download and embed all bundle >>>>>>>>>> dependencies. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> For instance, in place of having: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> <dependencies> >>>>>>>>>> <dependency .../> >>>>>>>>>> <dependency .../> >>>>>>>>>> <dependency .../> >>>>>>>>>> <dependency .../> >>>>>>>>>> <dependency .../> >>>>>>>>>> <dependency .../> >>>>>>>>>> <dependency .../> >>>>>>>>>> <dependency .../> >>>>>>>>>> <dependency .../> >>>>>>>>>> <dependency .../> >>>>>>>>>> </dependendies> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> you simple have in the plugin >>>>>>>>>> <configuration> >>>>>>>>>> <features>myfeature</features> >>>>>>>>>> </configuration> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> So the POM is light, the version is defined in the features >>>>>>>>>> descriptor and it manages transitive dependencies to others features. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 03/02/2011 07:00 AM, David Jencks wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> I might understand what the archive-kar goal does now, from the >>>>>>>>>>> jira issue. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I would like to suggest that we eliminate this goal and just use >>>>>>>>>>> the kar packaging which generates both the features.xml and the kar >>>>>>>>>>> from the maven dependencies. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> When would the archive-kar goal be useful compared to the kar >>>>>>>>>>> packaging? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> thanks >>>>>>>>>>> david jencks >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 1, 2011, at 9:47 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi guys, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The purpose of the kar goal is to take a features descriptor and >>>>>>>>>>>> package the features descriptor and the related bundle into a kar >>>>>>>>>>>> archive (that's it's a goal of the features maven plugin). >>>>>>>>>>>> The kar deployer create a repo for these bundles. >>>>>>>>>>>> I raised KARAF-459 about that. At least, the kar goals should take >>>>>>>>>>>> an argument to define if the bundle are embedded in the kar or not. >>>>>>>>>>>> But, if the kar doesn't embed the bundle, what's the advantage of >>>>>>>>>>>> using a kar more than directly drop the features descriptor into >>>>>>>>>>>> the deploy directory :) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 03/01/2011 11:40 PM, David Jencks wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> I couldn't quite understand what the docs expected. What I think >>>>>>>>>>>>> is usable is the (undocumented) kar packaging which ought to look >>>>>>>>>>>>> something like this: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <project xmlns="http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0"; >>>>>>>>>>>>> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; >>>>>>>>>>>>> xsi:schemaLocation="http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/xsd/maven-4.0.0.xsd";> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <modelVersion>4.0.0</modelVersion> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <groupId>hibernate-osgi</groupId> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <artifactId>hibernate-osgi</artifactId> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <version>0.0.1-SNAPSHOT</version> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <packaging>kar</packaging> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <name>hibernate-osgi</name> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <dependencies> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <!-- put in the bundles you want in the features.xml and kar as >>>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies --> >>>>>>>>>>>>> </dependencies> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <build> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <plugins> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <plugin> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <groupId>org.apache.karaf.tooling</groupId> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <artifactId>features-maven-plugin</artifactId> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <version>2.99.99-SNAPSHOT</version> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <extensions>true</extensions> >>>>>>>>>>>>> </plugin> >>>>>>>>>>>>> </plugins> >>>>>>>>>>>>> </build> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> </project> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> This should generate a features.xml file inside the kar and >>>>>>>>>>>>> include the bundles you mentioned as entries in the feature.xml >>>>>>>>>>>>> and copied into the kar. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks >>>>>>>>>>>>> david jencks >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 1, 2011, at 2:15 PM, karafman wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To test the KAR feature, I compiled the trunk and executed the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> following >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pom.xml file: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <project xmlns="http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0"; >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> xsi:schemaLocation="http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/xsd/maven-4.0.0.xsd";> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <modelVersion>4.0.0</modelVersion> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <groupId>hibernate-osgi</groupId> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <artifactId>hibernate-osgi</artifactId> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <version>0.0.1-SNAPSHOT</version> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <packaging>pom</packaging> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <name>hibernate-osgi</name> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <build> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <plugins> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <plugin> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <groupId>org.apache.karaf.tooling</groupId> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <artifactId>features-maven-plugin</artifactId> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <version>2.99.99-SNAPSHOT</version> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <executions> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <execution> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <id>archive-kar</id> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <goals> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <goal>archive-kar</goal> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> </goals> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <configuration> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <featuresFile>src/main/resources/features.xml</featuresFile> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> </configuration> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> </execution> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> </executions> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> </plugin> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> </plugins> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> </build> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> </project> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Using this features.xml file: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <features> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <feature name="hibernate" version="3.3.2.GA"> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bundle>mvn:javax.xml.stream/com.springsource.javax.xml.stream/1.0.1</bundle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bundle>mvn:org.dom4j/com.springsource.org.dom4j/1.6.1</bundle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bundle>mvn:org.jboss.javassist/com.springsource.javassist/3.9.0.GA</bundle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bundle>mvn:javax.persistence/com.springsource.javax.persistence/1.0.0</bundle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bundle>mvn:org.antlr/com.springsource.antlr/2.7.7</bundle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bundle>mvn:net.sourceforge.cglib/com.springsource.net.sf.cglib/2.2.0</bundle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bundle>mvn:org.apache.commons/com.springsource.org.apache.commons.collections/3.2.1</bundle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bundle>mvn:org.apache.commons/com.springsource.org.apache.commons.logging/1.1.1</bundle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bundle>mvn:org.objectweb.asm/com.springsource.org.objectweb.asm/1.5.3</bundle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bundle>mvn:org.objectweb.asm/com.springsource.org.objectweb.asm.attrs/1.5.3</bundle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bundle>mvn:org.hibernate/com.springsource.org.hibernate/3.3.2.GA</bundle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bundle>mvn:org.hibernate/com.springsource.org.hibernate.annotations/3.3.1.ga</bundle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bundle>mvn:org.hibernate/com.springsource.org.hibernate.annotations.common/3.3.0.ga</bundle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bundle>mvn:org.hibernate/com.springsource.org.hibernate.ejb/3.3.2.GA</bundle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> </feature> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> </features> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The .kar file created didn't contain any of the bundles, just the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> features.xml file. The expected behavior is to (according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://karaf.apache.org/manual/2.2.1-SNAPSHOT/users-guide/kar.html): >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The kar-archive goal: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Reads all features specified in the features descriptor. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. For each feature, it resolves the bundles defined in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. All bundles are packaged into the kar archive. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, it appears the KAR feature is not doing what is stated in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the docs. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>> suggest we either change the documentation, or the archive-kar >>>>>>>>>>>>>> goal. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karafman >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Slayer of the JEE >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pounder of the Perl Programmer >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/KAR-feature-not-doing-what-the-docs-say-it-should-tp2606973p2606973.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from the Karaf - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Cheers, >>> Guillaume Nodet >>> ------------------------ >>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ >>> ------------------------ >>> Open Source SOA >>> http://fusesource.com >>> >> > > > > -- > Cheers, > Guillaume Nodet > ------------------------ > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ > ------------------------ > Open Source SOA > http://fusesource.com >
