I'm going to take a crack at writing a web page for this (even though I'm not the expert), just to get something down, which we can modify :-)
I'll put it up on our web site under a "uima.apache.org/staging/..." -Marshall On 8/9/2011 1:27 PM, Marshall Schor wrote: > +1 to add a page to our website somewhere that talks about OSGi bundling. > Since > I've never actually run any of the OSGi containers, I don't think I qualify to > do other than a "theory" page - and my theories are often not quite right :-) > - > so it would be good if you and/or others that have run things in Felix etc., > can > write something. > > I'm somewhat in favor of releasing the OSGi bundles as now packaged (once > they've been verified to work in this form), since Tommaso (for one) finds > them > useful and uses them in some projects. > > -Marshall > > On 8/9/2011 12:07 PM, Jörn Kottmann wrote: >> On 8/9/11 5:43 PM, Marshall Schor wrote: >>> A broader OSGi "support" for UIMA could be done, where we make UIMA aware of >>> OSGi, and have it use OSGi "services" to load classes from bundles, etc., >>> but >>> that hasn't been done. >>> >>> Let me know if this is off-base with respect to use cases you know >>> about...; any >>> testing appreciated:-) >> Well, I am still skeptical if it is a good idea to release this. Because it >> might >> simply not work for many. >> >> As soon as a user wants to mix the addon AEs with a custom AEs he needs >> to repackage everything. >> >> Why not directly tell our users, that they need to put everything into one >> bundle them self to get UIMA running in an OSGi container? >> >> Jörn >>
