I personally would love to have this developed. Un unfortunately cannot help much here. But will be great have news of the progress.
Great work David! El mié, 09-12-2009 a las 22:19 -0800, David Jencks escribió: > See also https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PLUTO-585 > > I've been working on getting pluto to run under osgi in geronimo 3, > wiring the pluto components with the osgi blueprint service. I now > have the basic geronimo admin console working this way. (there are a > few exceptions but they aren't related to pluto). > > I'm wondering how much of this to push back into pluto, and when. > Geronimo is not yet acting as a osgi rfc 66 web container, so the web > app bits of pluto are currently deployed in geronimo as regular web > apps (which means geronimo processes them into osgi bundles in its own > non-rfc-66 way). I have the blueprint wired bits in a separate bundle > from the web app bits. So, at the moment it seems to me that the > blueprint plan might be interesting but the whole thing is somewhat > geronimo specific at the moment. > > I'm also wondering just how well thought out the current assembly/ > wiring system is. I saw some evidence of some wiring being done > through the pluto-1-like fishing for components in a registry method > rather than DI. I changed SupportedModesServiceImpl towards a more DI > approach. Is this kind of change OK? Am I missing some distinction > about when DI is appropriate and when it is not so appropriate? If > the answer is that no one has really looked very hard I may work a bit > more on making the wiring more DI and more consistent. > > Any thought on this? > > many thanks > david jencks > > >
