I agree, but be careful with the wording: now, I'm pretty sure that the
users don't consider the minimal distribution as you do.
That's why I would prefer core, net, minimal.
My only concern is: do you think it's really expected by users. I mean,
net and minimal could be interesting for users, but core. We can always
do it, but I wonder if it's really helpful for the users.
My 0.02$
I'm still thinking about that ;)
Regards
JB
On 01/16/2014 03:52 PM, Ioannis Canellos wrote:
Well, the minimal distribution we have "was always meant" to be the
minimum possible distro, that could allow everything else to start via
features. So I am 100% aligned with Christian on this.
The only reason that the minimal distribution does not look like this
already, is that it has been a bit painful to isolate and decouple
parts of Karaf from each other.
So the minimal distro could just be: osgi framework + config admin +
scr + pax-url + karat features.
In my demo branch (https://github.com/iocanel/karaf/tree/karaf-light)
it looks like this with the addition of shell, but that can be made
optional too.
@Achim: Even though I see real value in such a thin server . The real
value comes from making Karaf so modular that it makes the extremely
thin server possible ;-) Don't forget that we are building a runtime
for modular applications, making the runtime itself modular is a must
imho.
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
