Awesome.. I totally agree that's the way the kernel SHOULD work. So
I'd too rather RC2 it.
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Today, I've hit a bug in ServiceMix Kernel (namely SMX4KNL-65), which
> is about the fact that moving the whole directory where the kernel has
> been started the first time does lead to an incorrect behavior (well,
> the kernel starts, but displays lots of errors). The main reason is
> that when starting, the bundles listed in the system folder are
> installed and felix barfs when installing two bundles with the same
> symbolic name / version, but with two diffferent urls. This happen
> because the url used when installing the bundle is the absolute path
> to the bundle in the system dir.
>
> Trying to fix this problem, I found a good solution would be to use
> the maven url style for the system bundles themselves, which would
> then make it easy to organize the system folder in a m2 style
> structure. So I've gone ahead and implemented that. In addition I've
> added a small feature to the filemonitor service to allow system
> properties to be interpolated when loading properties file for the
> config admin service (the purpose was to allow the use of
> ${servicemix.home} to define a m2 repository for the maven handler.
> The last step was to allow the features service to install some
> features at startup time.
>
> In short, there are been a few enhancements to the kernel, so that we
> should now be able to build the full distribution by adding the needed
> files to the system folder and reference the features to be installed.
> This should be much cleaner as the current way to build the
> distribution, which is to list all the new bundles in the
> startup.properties file (where the upper part needs to be kept in sync
> with the kernel), and is very error prone.
>
> The only problem is that it's not a trivial change, so I think we should
> either:
> * do a RC2 of the kernel, or
> * create a branch from the revision before I started those changes,
> release 1.0.0 from this branch, and change the version to 1.1-SNAPSHOT
>
> I'm leaning toward the first solution, as the goal is to rework a bit
> the full smx4 assembly to leverage those: the work to make the JBI
> components work as OSGi bundles is nearly finished and I'll start
> including those in the distribution next week (instead of using the
> JBI packaged components). So if we release 1.0.0 now, we won't use it
> for the full smx4 distribution, which is a bit silly.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>
--
Regards,
Hiram
Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
Open Source SOA
http://open.iona.com
