On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 14:02, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote:
> My comments inline:
>
>>> if I assume that all features descriptor install and start features by 
>>> default, to be able to install "my" feature, I need to have Camel features 
>>> descriptor installed to know camel-core.
>>> So it means that all Camel features have been installed if it's the default 
>>> behavior.
>>>
>>> So we have the same issue: I will have all Camel features installed/started.
>
>>No because you would not drop the camel features file in the deploy
>>folder.  It would be referenced using the  tag, thus not
>>installed directly.
>
> You are right, but it means that we distinguish feature provided by 
> <repository/> tag or features:addurl / features:install commands from the one 
> provided by a features descriptor in the deploy folder or in a KAR.
> I'm agree that it can work, but it means that there will be impact on 
> projects. For instance, we should ask to camel to split the features 
> descriptor in several files, same in ServiceMix, etc.


Why would you split anything ? I'm thinking if a user wants to install
camel-core, he simply writes its own simple feature which only has a
dependency on camel-core and drop it in the deploy folder.  If he then
want to add camel-blueprint, he just has to add one line to that xml.

If we go with flags, it's written in stone and can't easily be changed
(unless we advise users to do a big copy/paste) which is not easily
maintainable.

>
>
>>>
>>> If we don't want to define the behavior on the features itself, as I said 
>>> in the Jira comment, we can image to add a property in 
>>> etc/org.apache.karaf.features.cfg file:
>>>
>>> features.auto.start = feature1, feature2, feature24/1.1.0
>
>>Isn't that the same than the boot features then ?
>
> The boot features are installed/started at Karaf bootstrap. The features 
> descriptors should be present in the local system repo and the URL define in 
> the org.apache.karaf.features.cfg configuration.
> The auto.start features property defines the feature automatically 
> installed/started when a features descriptor is registered. It's not linked 
> to the Karaf bootstrap and could never be used.

Ok, makes sense.

>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
>> I do understand that use case, but adding a flag is kinda abritrary
>> and one may want some features while someone else want another set of
>> features, so adding some flags to the camel descriptor will only
>> benefit a few users.
>> I think to solve that problem, one should write a simple feature
>> descriptor with a single feature and dependencies on what they need.
>> Then they'd just drop that one and have what they want:
>>
>>
>>   mvn:org.apahce.camel:....
>>
>>       camel-blueprint
>>       ....
>>
>>
>>
>> That way, you don't drop camel features descriptor directly, but only
>> the ones you need instead.
>>
>> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:27, Jean-Baptiste Onofré [email protected]> wrote:
>>> Yes, I think we should distinguish the two kinds of features.
>>>
>>> For instance, when adding the camel features descriptor, you have a bunch 
>>> of features.
>>>
>>> If it makes to have camel-core, camel-spring and camel-blueprint 
>>> automatically installed, I don't think it's the case for camel-stream, 
>>> camel-atom, etc as it depends of the user usage.
>>>
>>> I'm afraid that installing all features by default will install a lot of 
>>> features for nothing and Karaf will be weight for nothing (especially 
>>> regarding ServiceMix :)).
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On Fri 27/05/11 11:23 , Guillaume Nodet  wrote::
>>>
>>> I agree.  The question is does it make sense to have the features
>>> available but not installed ?  If not we could just change the
>>> behavior without adding any flags at all.
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:18, Jean-Baptiste Onofré [email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>
>>>> currently, if you drop a features descriptor ino the deploy folder, the 
>>>> features are present, but not installed and the bundles are not started.
>>>>
>>>> So the users have to install the features by hand after.
>>>>
>>>> More over, it's the same behavior with a KAR: no features in the KAR are 
>>>> installed/started.
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand, it could have sense to have features installed/started 
>>>> automatically when adding the features URL.
>>>>
>>>> For instance, adding the Camel features descriptor URL could automatically 
>>>> install/start camel-core, camel-spring and camel-blueprint features.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> JB
>>>>
>>>> On Fri 27/05/11 11:08 , Guillaume Nodet  wrote::
>>>>
>>>> What would be the effect ? installing the feature or starting the
>>>> bundles, or both ?
>>>> I think dropping a feature descriptor in the deploy folder should
>>>> automatically install the feature (and start the bundles), I'm not
>>>> sure to see what the benefit of not doing that would be.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 10:54, Jean-Baptiste Onofré [email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you think about adding an autostart attribute on the features 
>>>>> element ?
>>>>>
>>>>> The purpose is to be able to have something like:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> When an user register a features descriptor (using features:addurl), 
>>>>> deploy a KAR containing a features descriptor or drop a features 
>>>>> descriptor in the deploy folder, Karaf will try to automatically start 
>>>>> the features with autostart flag set to true.
>>>>>
>>>>> It will avoid users to:
>>>>> - start by hand features contained in a KAR: the user can drop the KAR 
>>>>> into the deploy folder, but he must connect to Karaf and start the 
>>>>> features by hand
>>>>> - start by hand features after an addurl when the user "controls" the 
>>>>> features content
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> JB
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> ------------------------
>>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>> ------------------------
>>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/>>>
>>>> ------------------------
>>>> Open Source SOA
>>>> http://fusesource.com>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ------------------------
>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>> ------------------------
>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/>>
>>> ------------------------
>>> Open Source SOA
>>> http://fusesource.com>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ------------------------
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/>
>> ------------------------
>> Open Source SOA
>> http://fusesource.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>
>
>
>



-- 
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

Reply via email to