Hi David,
Agree, it's not the same purpose/scope.
Regards
JB
On 04/12/2013 07:00 PM, David Jencks wrote:
The scope of karat features is also much much smaller than subsystems since
karat features don't provide isolation.
david jencks
On Apr 12, 2013, at 9:54 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Andrei,
the first plan is to coexist.
It's the same plan for P2 repositories.
Features is the central and main provisioning for Karaf: we don't plan to move
to something else for now.
However, provide "bridges" between others systems (like subsystems and P2) is
interesting (both in the runtime and in the karaf-maven-plugin).
The scope coverage of the Karaf features is "larger" (at least for now) than
subsystem. For instance, the ConfigAdmin/ConfigFile support is very limited in subsystems
comparing to Karaf Features.
Regards
JB
On 04/12/2013 06:48 PM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
Jean-Baptiste
Can you please clarify what are karaf plans
as it relates to features vs subsystems?
http://blog.osgi.org/2012/06/core-release-5-and-enterprise-release-5.html
* will features be replaced by subsystems?
* will features continue as independent?
* will they co-exist
* etc.
Thank you,
Andrei
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
