Hi, the Configurator specification (as well as the Configuration Admin one) does not support merging of configurations.
Unfortunately, a use case of merging has never been brought up to the expert group during the discussions and therefore we didn't consider this at all. That said, I think it would be great if you could create an issue in the public OSGi issue tracker for this. This will make it easier to consider for the expert group and it doesn't get lost. I think it's too late for the R7 release as we're almost done with all the specification work and are currently finalizing the release. But it's something we can consider for R8. Regards Carsten Osgi Developer Mail List wrote > I have some thoughts/questions about the upcoming configurator > specification in OSGi R7 > <https://osgi.org/download/osgi.enterprise-7.0.0-early-draft-2017-10.pdf>. > > The spec talks about the concept of a configuration ranking, by which > the configurator service selects the most appropriate configuration to > apply. But what if we already have a working configuration deployed and > only wish to override certain values? Can we do something like the > following? > > [existing-baseline-configuration.json] > { > "my.pid": { > ":configurator:ranking": "0", > "key_one": "configured_value", > "key_two": "configured_value", > "key_three": "configured_value" > } > } > > [new-partial-configuration.json] > { > "my.pid": { > ":configurator:ranking": "1", > "key_three": "overriding_value" > } > } > > Normally in this scenario I assume [new-partial-configuration.json] will > be selected as the one to apply and the other will be completely > ignored. But I would hope there is a way to tell the configurator we > want to merge a configuration with the next-highest-ranked > configuration, such that the configurator will ultimately resolve > something like the following: > > [effective configuration] > { > "my.pid": { > "key_one": "configured_value", > "key_two": "configured_value", > "key_three": "overriding_value" > } > } > > I realise this behaviour isn't /always/ what we'd want, but perhaps we > could apply some PID-level configurator key to > [new-partial-configuration.json] to opt in, e.g. > "/:configurator:override-strategy": "complete/partial/whatever"/ > > Since something like this doesn't appear to be mentioned in the latest > draft I assume it's not currently planned, but I'm hoping I've > misunderstood or misread some part of it because this seems like an easy > win to me. Perhaps there has been internal discussion of something like > this and it was dismissed for some reason? I realise it adds some > complexity to the implementation but I don't think it really adds any > confusion to the mental model for users. > > Any further comment or discussion would be welcome, > > Cheers, > > Eli > > > _______________________________________________ > OSGi Developer Mail List > osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org > https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev > -- Carsten Ziegeler Adobe Research Switzerland cziege...@apache.org _______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
