Blueprint as an architectural pattern is part of the OSGi enterprise spec so why shouldn't it be "pure" OSGi?
Cheers Daniel On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Jacek Laskowski <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau > <[email protected]> wrote: >> IMHO we should work with blueprint but it shouldn't be mandatory...at least >> from a user point of view (i mean the user can be able to deploy an >> ejbmodule as a bundle). >> >> I don't know so much about blueprint so maybe my previous sentence doesn't >> make so sense. If it is the case simply ignore it ;) > > Ignored :) > > It's the same situation when OSGi is embraced for its modularity to > build application server foundation with no change for an end user. It > was the case for WAS 6.1 and 7.0 (with Feature Pack), and JBoss AS, > GlassFish before they exposed it as another framework to build > enterprise apps with. Blueprint doesn't preclude using a pure OSGi (if > I'm even allowed to claim there's a pure OSGi). It's still OSGi, but > with some goodies that help dealing with dynamicity you may have > suffered from in activators, tracers or similar. > > I hope to show a simple change soon. Don't worry about it for now. > > Jacek > > -- > Jacek Laskowski > Java EE, functional languages and IBM WebSphere - http://blog.japila.pl > Warszawa JUG conference = Confitura (formerly Javarsovia) :: > http://confitura.pl > "Hoping to save time by spending it" by David Blevins (Apache OpenEJB)
