Well, maybe part of the problem is that bundles are not self contained?
I often see bundles that can only live when some other bundles are
around as well, tightly coupled. Why not put these bundles in one
bundle?
I do believe repositories are necessary, but I am also a strong
believer of doing
it right from the beginning and not using the tools to solve problems
that were
created earlier. The tools already have a hard enough time with the
intrinsic
complexity.
Kind regards,
Peter Kriens
On 3 jun 2008, at 14:15, Jeff McAffer wrote:
I think it is crucial that bundles run out of the box and not require
you to chase other bundles to get it to work. This first level
experience is
quite important. Just doubling the number of bundles because you
might
have
to stop a bundle does not like the right trade off to me.
In the OSGi build, all the implementations care the interfaces they
implement
so they always run out of the box so setup is simplified.
It is important to simplify consumption. Agreed. However,
personally I
don't find this to be a motivating argument here. In our experience
writing
large OSGi-based systems it is relatively rare that a bundle
implementation
is self-contained so putting the API with the impl still does not
give you
just one bundle you can install and run.
Instead I would prefer to see people use a comprehensive provisioning
mechanism (insert shameless plug for p2) rather than sacrifice
architecture
or flexibility. This is not to say that putting API with impl is
wrong,
just that the "out of the box" argument does not work for me.
Jeff
_______________________________________________
OSGi Developer Mail List
osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org
https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
_______________________________________________
OSGi Developer Mail List
osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org
https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
