Well I was just referring to your example but I get your point. Which reminds me of EnRoute <http://enroute.osgi.org/> project which despite the big names and the most popular OSGI build tool behind it, doesn't seem to get as much traction as I expected!
That said, I really admire your enthusiasm and wish KarafBoot can be more successful that that. I'm not trying to discourage you! Just it seams what you are after is something that other people have tried already with questionable success. Best, Milen On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote: > And how to you deal with jpa, jta, rest, etc with SCR annotations ? > > Regards > JB > > > On 09/10/2015 07:16 PM, Milen Dyankov wrote: > >> So correct me if I'm wrong but if I get the sample you provided in the >> first mail and replace: >> - the parent pom with "maven-bundle-plugin" >> - @Bean with @Component >> - @Init with @Activate >> >> wouldn't that have the exact same end result? I mean it obviously differ >> in >> terms of what gets generated (Blueprint vs DS) but form end user >> perspective there is no difference, right? >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 6:55 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Hey Milen, >>> >>> Actually, there's too part: >>> 1/ karaf-boot-starter will do the ready to start artifact, embedding >>> karaf, but it's another point >>> 2/ the value of karaf-boot annotations and plugin is first to simplify >>> the >>> bundle/artifact ready to be deploy-able into Karaf (generate the >>> "plumbing" >>> easily for developers). >>> >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>> >>> On 09/10/2015 06:50 PM, Milen Dyankov wrote: >>> >>> " ... that you deploy in Karaf ..." >>>> >>>> OK may be I misunderstood the concept. I thought the result is >>>> standalone >>>> executable JAR, thus my comments above. If on the other hand I need to >>>> install Karaf and then deploy my services into it I really don't see how >>>> it >>>> differs form what people are doing now? >>>> >>>> I'm sorry if I'm not making much sense. I didn't have the time to >>>> experiment with your code and samples so may be I'm missing an important >>>> peace here. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Milen >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Allow me to disagree: Karaf is a perfect container for microservices. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Image to create a microservice (using karaf-boot) that you deploy in >>>>> Karaf >>>>> and use such service in another microservice, all wired with OSGi >>>>> service >>>>> and Karaf: we leverage OSGi/Karaf as a microservices container. >>>>> >>>>> But even without talking of microservices, new developers to Karaf (and >>>>> OSGi generally speaking) are frustrated by the effort on non business >>>>> code >>>>> to do (I have to write an Activator, or a descriptor, etc, etc). >>>>> So, a tooling to simplify this is still a valid addition IMHO. >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> JB >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 09/10/2015 06:23 PM, Milen Dyankov wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I might be wrong but I think the whole success of SpringBoot (apart >>>>> from >>>>> >>>>>> having the "Spring" in it) is the microservices hype! >>>>>> it's quick and easy but most usecases follow the "create one (or very >>>>>> few) >>>>>> service(s), pack them as single executable and access them via REST" >>>>>> pattern. We can obviously do the same with OSGi and Karaf in >>>>>> particular >>>>>> but >>>>>> personally I think this makes absolutely no sense. In such approach >>>>>> one >>>>>> in >>>>>> not benefiting form OSGi almost at all. Honestly speaking I would >>>>>> argue >>>>>> that if one does not understand how OSGi service layer works >>>>>> (regardless >>>>>> of >>>>>> the framework used to register/access services) it makes no sense to >>>>>> use >>>>>> OSGi at all. >>>>>> >>>>>> Just my 2 cents! >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Milen >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Christian Schneider < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I already created such a maven plugin in aries. The user can use >>>>>> standard >>>>>> >>>>>> CDI and JEE annotations and the result is blueprint xml. >>>>>>> How is the new approach different / better? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why should it be good for the developer to move away from well >>>>>>> defined >>>>>>> standard annotations and use custom annotations that bind him to >>>>>>> karaf? >>>>>>> I mean if this is created by the spring guys I know they want to >>>>>>> catch >>>>>>> people by perceived simplicity and then make sure to make it >>>>>>> difficult >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> switch. As an open source comminity I do not know why we should do >>>>>>> something like this. >>>>>>> Abstracting away from frameworks just means you create another layer >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> people then also have to learn. There were some cases in the past >>>>>>> where >>>>>>> this make sense because the underlying frameworks sucked (like JEE >>>>>>> 2). >>>>>>> This >>>>>>> is not the case today though I think. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What kind of use case do you have in mind? Every project starts small >>>>>>> but >>>>>>> it needs to be able to grow then. You can not start with custom >>>>>>> annoations >>>>>>> and then tell people to later switch to something else when the >>>>>>> project grows. I think it makes more sense to make it easier for >>>>>>> people >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> use the standard annoations and use the right dependencies. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If we simply provide a tooling that makes it easy to start with SCR >>>>>>> or >>>>>>> blueprint we provide much more value for people as thery can then >>>>>>> grow >>>>>>> without any breaking changes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Christian >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 10.09.2015 um 17:46 schrieb Jean-Baptiste Onofré: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Because all these annotations are runtime: here we talk about tooling >>>>>>> at >>>>>>> >>>>>>> build time. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> More over, the purpose is to provide more high level annotations, >>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>> abstract actual annotations/frameworks that we can use under hood. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The purpose of centralizing all in karaf-boot is to have a central >>>>>>>> project: the developer just use karaf-boot, it doesn't really know >>>>>>>> what >>>>>>>> technologies are involved behind the scene. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For instance, in spring-boot, they use activemq, jersey, etc, but >>>>>>>> all >>>>>>>> from spring-boot. The developers don't know a rest service use >>>>>>>> jersey >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> instance, it's completely abstracted. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Again the purpose is to simplify life for developers: splitting the >>>>>>>> annotations in different projects introduces complexity (at least to >>>>>>>> find >>>>>>>> the dependencies and core import packages). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If an advanced developer wants to use CDI, SCR, etc, he can of >>>>>>>> course. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 09/10/2015 05:40 PM, Christian Schneider wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am not really enthusiastic about duplicating functionality of cxf >>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> aries. Aries supports a very nice approach for injections, jpa and >>>>>>>>> jta. >>>>>>>>> Why should it make sense to recreate that? >>>>>>>>> Aries blueprint also has annoation support even in two flavors >>>>>>>>> (CDI, >>>>>>>>> custom). How does the new approach interact with this? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Instead I propose we create support for such annotations in the >>>>>>>>> respective projects (where they are missing) and concentrate on >>>>>>>>> karaf >>>>>>>>> as >>>>>>>>> a container not an application development framework. >>>>>>>>> By leveraging the existing frameworks we profit from their own >>>>>>>>> development teams. Whatever we recreate will have to be developed >>>>>>>>> by >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> very few resources of the karaf team. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Christian >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Am 10.09.2015 um 16:53 schrieb Jean-Baptiste Onofré: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> thanks for your feedback. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I fully agree about providing more high level annotations (it's >>>>>>>>>> what I >>>>>>>>>> do with @jpa, @rest, @soap, @jta annotations). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I agree that the current annotations are too low level, and >>>>>>>>>> blueprint >>>>>>>>>> "oriented". I just move forward a bit with the current codebase, >>>>>>>>>> just >>>>>>>>>> to illustrate karaf-boot usage in the samples. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> But again, you are right, and I will create a new annotations set. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> One of the purpose of karaf-boot annotations is to "abstract" the >>>>>>>>>> actual code/artifact that we generate. So, if now we generate >>>>>>>>>> blueprint, without changing the karaf-boot annotations, we will be >>>>>>>>>> able to generate something else (why not SCR, etc). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I agree with a BOM, but I think it's interesting to provide both: >>>>>>>>>> - providing a ready to use parent pom allows developers to create >>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>> very simple pom.xml where all plugins and dependencies are already >>>>>>>>>> defined >>>>>>>>>> - for more advanced devs, they can create their own pom.xml >>>>>>>>>> starting >>>>>>>>>> from the BOM or archetype. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks again for your feedback ! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 09/10/2015 04:44 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I like the idea. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> For the annotations, we need to keep really high level. The >>>>>>>>>>> annotations in >>>>>>>>>>> the code base right now are much too close to blueprint. >>>>>>>>>>> I think we need to grab a small enough subset so that the >>>>>>>>>>> annotations >>>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>>> easy to understand for beginners and without any ambiguities, >>>>>>>>>>> even >>>>>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> cost of features. >>>>>>>>>>> For example, I think we should restrict to constructor injection, >>>>>>>>>>> so >>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>> we don't have any bind / rebind / init methods. We simply need >>>>>>>>>>> an >>>>>>>>>>> optional >>>>>>>>>>> @Destroy. In case the dependencies change at runtime, simply >>>>>>>>>>> destroy >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> bean / service and recreate it the dependencies are still met >>>>>>>>>>> after >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> change. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If blueprint is to be hidden completely, we may find a better >>>>>>>>>>> alternative >>>>>>>>>>> in SCR or even Felix Dependency Manager, but it does not matter >>>>>>>>>>> too >>>>>>>>>>> much >>>>>>>>>>> for now. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I agree with the idea of using a BOM instead of a parent if >>>>>>>>>>> possible. I'm >>>>>>>>>>> not very familiar, but this is less invasive. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The real problems will come with the support of higher level >>>>>>>>>>> annotations >>>>>>>>>>> for JAXRS, JPA, etc... >>>>>>>>>>> Not really sure how to handle those yet... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 2015-09-09 16:32 GMT+02:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected] >>>>>>>>>>> >: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I worked on a prototype about Karaf Boot. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Let me give you some backgrounds and discuss about that all >>>>>>>>>>>> together. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Why Karaf Boot ? >>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------- >>>>>>>>>>>> When you develop artifacts (bundles) to be deployed in Karaf, >>>>>>>>>>>> you >>>>>>>>>>>> can see >>>>>>>>>>>> that the actual time that you spend on your business code is >>>>>>>>>>>> finally >>>>>>>>>>>> largely less important that all the plumbing effort that you >>>>>>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>>>>> (writing OSGi Activator, or blueprint/scr descriptor, etc). >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It means that your "go to market" is longer, and we should >>>>>>>>>>>> provide >>>>>>>>>>>> something that allows you to focus on your code. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Even if SCR annotations is a very good step forward, some use >>>>>>>>>>>> cases >>>>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>>>> not so easy to do (JPA, JTA for instance). >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> And anyway, you have to prepare your pom.xml with different >>>>>>>>>>>> plugin >>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>> dependency. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Moreover, when you have your artifacts, you have to prepare >>>>>>>>>>>> Karaf >>>>>>>>>>>> container, and deploy those artifacts there. Even if it's >>>>>>>>>>>> "container" >>>>>>>>>>>> approach is the most important for me, we can give even more >>>>>>>>>>>> flexibility by >>>>>>>>>>>> providing a way to embed and prepare Karaf in a ready to execute >>>>>>>>>>>> jar/artifact. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> What is Karaf Boot ? >>>>>>>>>>>> -------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>> Karaf Boot provides four components: >>>>>>>>>>>> * karaf-boot-parent is the Maven parent pom that your project >>>>>>>>>>>> just >>>>>>>>>>>> inherit: that's all ! All plugins, dependencies, etc are >>>>>>>>>>>> described >>>>>>>>>>>> in this >>>>>>>>>>>> parent, you even don't have to define packaging as bundle, >>>>>>>>>>>> standard >>>>>>>>>>>> jar is >>>>>>>>>>>> fine. >>>>>>>>>>>> * karaf-boot (coming with karaf-boot-parent) provides >>>>>>>>>>>> annotations >>>>>>>>>>>> that you >>>>>>>>>>>> use directly in your business code (like @Bean, @Service, >>>>>>>>>>>> @Reference, >>>>>>>>>>>> @Inject, etc): again, your focus on your code, karaf-boot deals >>>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>> plumbing. >>>>>>>>>>>> * karaf-boot-maven-plugin (coming with karaf-boot-parent) scan >>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>> classes >>>>>>>>>>>> and generate a blueprint XML. For now, I'm using blueprint >>>>>>>>>>>> generation >>>>>>>>>>>> (because we can cover lot of use cases, for instance, I plan to >>>>>>>>>>>> provide >>>>>>>>>>>> @rest annotation that will generate blueprint XML with cxf jaxrs >>>>>>>>>>>> server, >>>>>>>>>>>> etc). >>>>>>>>>>>> * karaf-boot-starter is the module providing a convenient way to >>>>>>>>>>>> embed, >>>>>>>>>>>> configure and bootstrap Karaf. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Just to illustrate this, let's take a look on the >>>>>>>>>>>> karaf-boot-sample-simple. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The pom.xml is really simple: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> >>>>>>>>>>>> <project xmlns="http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0"; xmlns:xsi=" >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; xsi:schemaLocation=" >>>>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0 >>>>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/xsd/maven-4.0.0.xsd";> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <modelVersion>4.0.0</modelVersion> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <parent> >>>>>>>>>>>> <groupId>org.apache.karaf.boot</groupId> >>>>>>>>>>>> <artifactId>karaf-boot-parent</artifactId> >>>>>>>>>>>> <version>1.0.0-SNAPSHOT</version> >>>>>>>>>>>> </parent> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <artifactId>karaf-boot-sample-simple</artifactId> >>>>>>>>>>>> <version>1.0.0-SNAPSHOT</version> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> </project> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> You can see, the only thing that the developer has to do: define >>>>>>>>>>>> karaf-boot-parent as parent pom. That's all. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Now, in the code, you have just one bean that we want to run: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> package org.apache.karaf.boot.sample.simple; >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> import org.apache.karaf.boot.Bean; >>>>>>>>>>>> import org.apache.karaf.boot.Init; >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> @Bean(id = "simple-bean") >>>>>>>>>>>> public class SimpleBean { >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> @Init >>>>>>>>>>>> public void simple() { >>>>>>>>>>>> System.out.println("Hello world"); >>>>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> You can see the @Bean and @Init karaf-boot annotations. The >>>>>>>>>>>> karaf-boot-maven-plugin will generate the blueprint descriptor >>>>>>>>>>>> using >>>>>>>>>>>> this. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Current Status >>>>>>>>>>>> -------------- >>>>>>>>>>>> I pushed Karaf Boot structure there: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/jbonofre/karaf-boot >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It's a mix of rewrapping of existing code (from aries, pax-exam, >>>>>>>>>>>> etc) and >>>>>>>>>>>> additions. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I created the annotations, I'm now working on the >>>>>>>>>>>> karaf-boot-maven-plugin >>>>>>>>>>>> based on Christian's work in aries (I'm actually scanning the >>>>>>>>>>>> boot >>>>>>>>>>>> annotations now, and generating the XML). >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I will push new changes later today and tomorrow. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Open Questions >>>>>>>>>>>> --------------- >>>>>>>>>>>> * For now, I would prefer to be 'artifacts' and 'resources' >>>>>>>>>>>> generator: I >>>>>>>>>>>> think it's better than to depend to a feature running in Karaf, >>>>>>>>>>>> but >>>>>>>>>>>> it's >>>>>>>>>>>> open to discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>> * I'm now generating blueprint. Probably native OSGi or scr >>>>>>>>>>>> generation can >>>>>>>>>>>> make sense. >>>>>>>>>>>> * I'm generating bundles: thanks to the Karaf4 features >>>>>>>>>>>> resolver, >>>>>>>>>>>> as >>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>> bundles provide requirements/capabilities metadata, I think >>>>>>>>>>>> it's a >>>>>>>>>>>> good >>>>>>>>>>>> start. However, maybe it's worth to be able to create features, >>>>>>>>>>>> kar, >>>>>>>>>>>> profile. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts ? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>> 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 > -- http://about.me/milen
