Hi
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Raymond Feng <[email protected]> wrote: > What really matters here is the mechanism. The feature poms we have now are > just some pre-canned profiles to demonstrate ways of grouping modules > together (like the various Eclipse packages for people to pick). They are > choices and there are always specific needs to regroup. If you are not happy > with the grouping, you can easily add yours. > Thanks, > Raymond Right, the point here is that we are defining a mechanism that is able to produce the artifacts that we want to see in the binary Tuscany distribution. Another useful question is what should the output artifacts be. From past discussion we seem to need... - full set of Tuscany jars and their dependencies (either naturally OSGi or converted to OSGi by Tuscany) should the user whish to pick and choose, or more importantly replace, individual parts of the runtime - shaded jars that present core and extensions that can be easily combined on the classpath to create a working runtime - suitable OGSi configuration to allow both OSGi runtime and Eclipse target platform to be configured with Tuscany and dependency Jars. What else is required as output? Simon -- Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
