2015-04-14 8:52 GMT+02:00 Christian Schneider <[email protected]>:
> I was not aware we have this information in the wires. I will try to > implement it using these. > > So what I would do is this: > I start with the features to be stopped / started. > I then propagate down to the subfeatures / bundles. > For each feature processed I compute the state as the highest state of all > features that depend on it and the requested state. > > Does that make sense? > I think that's exactly what is currently done. > > The problem in this algorithm is that in many cases we will not be able to > stop features / bundles as they are needed by other features. > So probably we will need some reporting to explain why some features / > bundles could not achieve the request state. To really stop a feature the > user would then > have to stop all top level features. Only then would it really change its > state. > > We could also have kind of a force mode where we change the state first to > the top and then down again. So this would guarantee that a feature changes > its state but it could shut down half of karaf unintendedly. Which would be > especially dangerous if we hit some core features like the feature service. > So I tend to rather not support this. > > > Christian > > > On 13.04.2015 18:01, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > >> Yeah, I was thinking about it. >> Though the obvious other solution is to fix it. >> >> I have actually started an email this morning to discuss but I haven't >> finished it. >> >> Overall, I think it may not be very difficult to fix, as the bundle state >> changes are already handled correctly afaik. The real problem is to agree >> on the semantics on the effects, so that we can compute the desired state >> of each bundle correctly. >> >> Problems arise when a bundle is used by several features, one of which >> being started and the other resolved. >> >> Anyway, it's really up to you, I don't mind fixing the code as long as we >> agree on the behaviour. >> >> 2015-04-13 17:51 GMT+02:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>: >> >> Hi all, >>> >>> I discussed with Christian about KARAF-3102. >>> >>> The feature lifecycle doesn't actually fully work, especially around the >>> stop action. >>> >>> In order to avoid to perturb the users, I think we should remove the >>> features lifecycle commands. Else, if they are provided, users will try >>> it >>> and may be disappointed as they won't work as expected. >>> >>> WDYT ? >>> >>> Regards >>> JB >>> -- >>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>> [email protected] >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com >>> >>> > > -- > Christian Schneider > http://www.liquid-reality.de > > Open Source Architect > http://www.talend.com > >
