On 4 May 2011 10:51, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote: > It makes sense to have sub-projects in Karaf: > - WebContainer (using Pax Web) > - EnterpriseContainer (using Aries, OpenJPA) > - OBR (using Felix BundleRepository, home mage stuff) > - Cluster (using Cellar/Hazelcast) > > In that case, Karaf itself will be a very lightweight container. > > Pro: > - Karaf itself is more clean and light > - Karaf dependencies are more easy to manage (the dependencies management > move to subproject)
Its also easier to manage release lifecycles with more granular projects. e.g. Cellar is going to be under a state of flux and active development for some time; whereas Karaf is much more stable & already used in lots of projects. We learnt the hard way on the ServiceMix project that separating out the Kernel release from features-above-the-kernel makes things much easier for folks managing their dependencies & release schedules. (e.g. you might want to use Cellar in 2.x and 3.x versions of Karaf for some time yet). -- James ------- FuseSource Email: [email protected] Web: http://fusesource.com Twitter: jstrachan Blog: http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ Open Source Integration
