Re: [jclouds/jclouds-karaf] JCLOUDS-1172: Explicitly fallback to the Groovy scripting engine (#78)
Absolutely! :) -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-karaf/pull/78#issuecomment-246199320
Re: [jclouds/jclouds-karaf] JCLOUDS-1172: Explicitly fallback to the Groovy scripting engine (#78)
Closed #78. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-karaf/pull/78#event-785275406
Re: [jclouds/jclouds-karaf] JCLOUDS-1172: Explicitly fallback to the Groovy scripting engine (#78)
@nacx Good to close this? -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-karaf/pull/78#issuecomment-246185494
Re: [jclouds/jclouds-karaf] JCLOUDS-1172: Explicitly fallback to the Groovy scripting engine (#78)
Absolutely :) I'll give a try to the PRs in a while. Thanks! -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-karaf/pull/78#issuecomment-245184117
Re: [jclouds/jclouds-karaf] JCLOUDS-1172: Explicitly fallback to the Groovy scripting engine (#78)
> We have already the default engine jars in the classpath, and if we throw an > exception users won't be able to workaround it. Given that, as you say, we _should_ have valid scripting engines on the classpath, if we are not able to load those in the OSGi environment I would consider that something like a "fatal error" and would be tempted to blow up. In other words, I can't see any reason why this should be transient, and if it's broken I'd say it's something I'd rather have a JIRA ticket for. Does that make some kind of sense? -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-karaf/pull/78#issuecomment-245183901
Re: [jclouds/jclouds-karaf] JCLOUDS-1172: Explicitly fallback to the Groovy scripting engine (#78)
Great! Would it make sense to keep this anyway as a sane fallback, or should we replace it by a runtime exception? Silently returning null is not OK. We have already the default engine jars in the classpath, and if we throw an exception users won't be able to workaround it. I'd say that even with your patch it makes sense to keep this fallback. WDYT? -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-karaf/pull/78#issuecomment-245183163
Re: [jclouds/jclouds-karaf] JCLOUDS-1172: Explicitly fallback to the Groovy scripting engine (#78)
Thanks for this, @nacx! I think I'm a little closer to getting the `OGSiScriptEngineManager` approach that you linked to originally to work - will try to see if I can figure that out one way or the other soon -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-karaf/pull/78#issuecomment-245134381
