If there are any particularly expert OSGi folks out there that want to help rock NiFi's world please let us know. We have Nars which give us isolation and help devs focus on building isolated bundles of functional joy but I'd bet you could convince/motivate a move to OSGi if it can be done nicely.
I think we're good with a bit of growing pains provided the developer experience to build extensions is awesome. The bottom line goal is making it really easy for people to build extensions. On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Drew Farris <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks for the excellent summary Adam. I'm not very familiar with OSGi at a > deep level. > > I find the point re dependency management point below pretty interesting. > One of the chief reasons I'd look to using OSGi would be to allow multiple > versions of the same dependency to be used by isolated modules. I don't > always enjoy manually de-conflicting version incompatibilities and would > prefer isolation in some cases. > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 2:42 AM, Adam Taft <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > In contrast, OSGi bundles do not traditionally include dependencies as > part > > of the bundle archive. Instead with OSGi, only a single copy of any > common > > library is maintained for the entire application framework. i.e. one and > > only one copy of any commons jar is ever loaded. Additionally, OSGi > > provides version conflict resolution, somewhat similar to maven conflict > > resolution. OSGi benefits from reduced permgen usage loading due to > these > > features. > > > > > > >
