Le mer. 24 mars 2021 à 17:35, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net> a écrit :
> Actually, spec like as DocuentBuilder would be rather a library, shared by > all launchers. > Ok but what about jackson? the same? Joke apart what if spring-boot-app1 uses one impl and spring-boot-app2 uses another one? Think at the end there is the JVM, the framework stack which is isolated from the app and the apps or it does not move the ball very far from what we have today. Until there is it is EE server - in terms of architecture not scope/impl. But the gold of this solution is the ability to configure the leakage between layers/profiles to let an app override and potentially aggregate/share parts. Obvious example is the http service which can leak in spring boot app to override the servlet layer enabling to admistrate it globally. Another more advanced solution is to deploy app1 and app2 called each other through a kafka topic and replace kafka stack by a local event (event admin or not is an impl detail), imagine the perf boost and admin simplicity it will bring - all that meaning saving a lot of green piece of paper for managers ;). My only "?" as of today is: why OSGi, this technology is not really needed for such a project (for ex this module provides it wihout OSGi https://github.com/Talend/component-runtime/tree/master/container/container-core) and can bring several drawbacks like the slowness to upgrade libs due to meta, the blockers to add libs due to the lack of OSGi support, the enforcement of architecture teams to adopt OSGi to use that solution etc. Why not making OSGi a launcher as spring boot or microprofile, sounds to be at the same level to me. > > I would rather say that Karaf 5 is a runtime in the way of launcher. If we > consider an application server as launcher + some key turn features, then > Karaf5 could be considered as an new light app server. > > You are right: for now, each spring boot app is in its own class loader, > embedding its own spring version. > However, a spring boot module (karaf 5 terminology uses module more than > app) can use a profile. A profile basically brings a class loader where you > can override spring boot module dependencies. > > Great questions: Karaf 5 MVP is a first attempt, it will be refine for > sure. I just want to have a first running version to share with you all and > chat about. > > Regards > JB > > > Le 24 mars 2021 à 16:55, Grzegorz Grzybek <gr.grzy...@gmail.com> a > écrit : > > > > Thanks for the insight ;) > > > > So first question that comes to my mind is - what will > > `javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilderFactory#newInstance()` return? I guess > it > > depends on the layer. > > If this will be (via java.util.ServiceLoader#load()) be configured at low > > layer, we can have the "application server aspect"... > > > > Is "application server" view of Karaf 5 emphasized (existing at all?) > > somehow? > > Is Karaf 5 going to be a "deployment platform to run different kinds of > > applications"? > > For "Spring Boot applications classloaders" - will many "Spring Boot > > Applications" be separated? If yes, then will each Spring Boot > Application > > "bring its own Spring"? Or will the Spring libraries be part of given > Karaf > > 5 release? > > > > sorry for chaotic questions ;) But these are quite natural, assuming > > "single JVM process" by default (is it?) > > > > regards > > Grzegorz Grzybek > > > > śr., 24 mar 2021 o 16:46 Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net> > napisał(a): > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> Actually, you will have three class loader levels: > >> > >> - Level1: Karaf itself/Karaf services/libraries class loaders > >> - Level2: profiles class loader > >> - Level3: OSGi module running in the internal framework (inheriting > first > >> level) > >> - Level3: Spring Boot applications classloaders > >> - Level3: other kind of applications (micro profile, …) > >> > >> So, basically, framework will be used for OSGi modules mostly. > >> > >> Today, launchers are "isolated", but I will implement bridges. > >> > >> Regards > >> JB > >> > >>> Le 24 mars 2021 à 15:37, Grzegorz Grzybek <gr.grzy...@gmail.com> a > >> écrit : > >>> > >>> Hello > >>> > >>> OSGi Core R8 still assumes req/cap model[1] and resolution: > >>> > >>> The Framework must resolve bundles. > >>>> > >>> > >>> If OSGi (and thus resolution) is _internal_, what kind of "classpath" > >>> ("module path"?) will users see? Looking forward for 10000-feet > overview > >> of > >>> Karaf 5 ;) > >>> > >>> Is Connect specification[2] the inherent part of Karaf5? Is "classpath" > >>> generally flat, hierarchical or irrelevant (?) by default? > >>> > >>> Anyway - the future looks bright ;) > >>> > >>> regards > >>> Grzegorz Grzybek > >>> === > >>> [1]: > >>> > >> > https://docs.osgi.org/specification/osgi.core/8.0.0/framework.module.html#framework.module-resolving > >>> [2]: > >>> > >> > https://docs.osgi.org/specification/osgi.core/8.0.0/framework.connect.html > >>> > >>> śr., 24 mar 2021 o 15:24 Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net> > >> napisał(a): > >>> > >>>> Hi guys, > >>>> > >>>> As you probably know, we are working on first Karaf 5 MVP, which is a > >>>> complete Karaf refactoring. > >>>> > >>>> We will share some details soon, but I can already inform you that > >>>> internally, it’s powered by OSGi R8 (but you will see that it’s more > an > >>>> internal point). > >>>> > >>>> Regards > >>>> JB > >> > >> > >
