Good point with the progress bar. I also think it looks odd when it goes
back. I am thinking about making it only change when it actually goes
up. So the idea is to store the current percentage and only display a
new bar if the new percentage is higher. Technically this is not a
correct as the current solution but I think it looks more consistent. I
would also like to make sure it always ends with 100% in case of a
succesfull start so the user has the confidence that all went nicely.
Christian
Am 10.08.2012 10:01, schrieb Christoph Gritschenberger:
Hi,
Seems I started a somehow more fundamental discussion here about whether
karaf-startup should be delayed at all.
As far as I can tell now there seems to be some common ground now.
Ioannis summed it up pretty good: Providing some method of configuring
startup-delays OK. That's also what I had in mind.
I actually don't have a strong opinion about what should be karaf
default. There are valid points on both sides. I personally have no
problem with the "Press Enter"-approach but that's just me.
The progress bar looks a bit odd, because it may revert to less progress
when new bundles are installed by e.g. the features-installer.
kind regards,
christoph
On 09/08/12 21:09, Achim Nierbeck wrote:
Christian,
I'm sorry but I don't see any agreement on delay beeing the better
option, or beeing the default.
If you think it's ok to have the delay for your customers I'm fine if
you apply it to your custom distribution.
I'm also fine with opening a way to tell the shell how long it should
wait. I'm also fine to keep the "locked" shell
in Karaf for people to use for their own distribution.
So I'm +1 for the sum-up of Ioannis.
@Johan
how about a "Karaf started in MM:SS" in log :-D
regards, Achim
2012/8/9 Christian Schneider <[email protected]>:
I mostly agree besides for the default. I think we all agree that the
delayed start of the console is the better option for beginners while
a lot of karaf developers like the console that starts directly.
For this reason I think we should have the delayed start as default for two
reasons:
1. We are only a handfull of developers while there are thousands of users
and most are beginners or at least do not have a deep understanding of
karaf.
2. The delayed start is a nice out of the box experience for people who
start karaf for the first time. Especially the beginners will not find the
option to turn this on easily
Christian
Am 09.08.2012 19:40, schrieb Ioannis Canellos:
I've read a lot of interesting opinions and I'd like to share mine:
i) The Karaf shell should start asap, unless explicitly configured. The
enter thing is nice but should be optional imho.
ii) Determining when Karaf is started is one thing, determining when an
application is started is another.
iii) A log entry that says Karaf has started sounds enough, we can
optionally provide that info through the info command.
iv) Different users have different needs on what started means. To cover
all cases we could allow the user to use a configuration file that will
contain requirements (package, service etc) and have everyone configure it
however he wishes.
--
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de
Open Source Architect
Talend Application Integration Division http://www.talend.com
--
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de
Open Source Architect
Talend Application Integration Division http://www.talend.com
