l a specific bundle activator has been executed. In particular, I would
> like to perform some "environment validations” and checks and only if these
> are OK I would like to proceed with the Karaf boot-up.
>
> Thank you for you help,
> Matteo
>
>
--
Jean-Ba
Hello,
I would like to know if there is a way in Karaf to delay the boot process until
a specific bundle activator has been executed. In particular, I would like to
perform some "environment validations” and checks and only if these are OK I
would like to proceed with the Karaf boot-up.
Hi Scott,
yes, my Karaf Boot PoC is still on my github. I will move forward on
this one after 4.2.1 release and Vineyard donation.
You can also find the karaf boot presentation I did during last
ApacheCon NA.
Regards
JB
On 25/07/2018 19:39, Scott Lewis wrote:
> Some time
Some time ago there was discussion on this list about a smaller
(smaller/fewer bundles) starting point for karaf called 'karaf boot'.
I don't see anything about this on karaf.apache.org...is there still
work/planning, etc going on?
Thanks,
Scott
Hi Steinar,
All core jars are taken from system repository. Even startup.properties reads
from system repo.
Basically the minimum that you should have is the ones in startup.properties
and, if you don't want remote resolution, the ones in boot features.
Regards
JB
On 01/16/2018 07:22 PM,
The $KARAF_HOME/system directory is the top of an area laid out like a
maven repository, containing (in karaf 4.1.4) 64 jar files.
The repository is the first repository of the
org.ops4j.pax.url.mvn.defaultRepositories configuration setting.
How many of these jar files are needed for karaf to
board for building on. It's easier to add to a stack than
it is to take away.
From: Nick Baker [mailto:nba...@pentaho.com]
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 11:13 AM
To: user <user@karaf.apache.org>
Subject: Re: karaf boot
I believe one of the goals of the "Boot"
+ Camel + JMS to handle inter/intraProcess communication. Anyway, the
combination of the two is a solid foundation to build upon.
-Nick Baker
From: Guillaume Nodet <gno...@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 10:06:53 AM
To: user
Subject: Re: karaf boot
I have
Nodet <gno...@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 10:06 AM
To: user
Subject: Re: karaf boot
I have investigated reworking the blueprint core extender on top of DS months
ago, but I did not pursue. The Felix SCR core is now more reusable (I made it
that way in order to reuse it in pax-
;
>
>
> Would adopting such an approach make conversion away from blueprint
> easier? Would it make a migration path easier?
>
>
>
> Brad
>
>
>
> *From:* Christian Schneider [mailto:cschneider...@gmail.com] *On Behalf
> Of *Christian Schneider
> *Sent:* Monda
[mailto:gno...@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 6:26 AM
To: user <user@karaf.apache.org>
Subject: Re: karaf boot
2017-01-16 11:36 GMT+01:00 Christian Schneider <ch...@die-schneider.net
<mailto:ch...@die-schneider.net> >:
I generally like the idea of having one
matic way of working with the
stack without saying anything about other mechanisms either pro or con.
-Original Message-
From: Jean-Baptiste Onofré [mailto:j...@nanthrax.net]
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 4:43 AM
To: user@karaf.apache.org
Subject: Re: karaf boot
That's why karaf-boot
nversion away from blueprint easier?
Would it make a migration path easier?
Brad
From: Christian Schneider [mailto:cschneider...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Christian Schneider
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 4:37 AM
To: user@karaf.apache.org
Subject: Re: karaf boot
I generally like the idea
ms.
>
Read "but it's pluggable".
>
> I think this CDI stuff has all the benefits of CDI + DS without the
> drawbacks of blueprint, so I'd rather have us focusing on it.
>
>
>>
>>
>> Christian
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11.01.2017 22:03, Brad
well in the dynamic OSGi environment. It also nicely supports
> configs even when using the config factories where you can have one
> instance of your component per config instance.
>
> So for the moment I would rather use DS as a default dependency injection
> for karaf boo
That's why karaf-boot can provide starter and clearly document pro/cons.
End-users will choose the best match for their needs.
The same could happen for framework: I would like to create a REST
service, should I start with Jersey, with CXF-RS, ...
So, if in karaf-boot, it makes sense
-on-karaf-with
-Nick Baker
From: Jason Pratt <jpratt3...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 7:52:19 PM
To: user@karaf.apache.org
Subject: Re: karaf boot
Do you have any examples on github for this?
Sent from my iPad
On Jan 11, 2017, at 4:38 PM, Nick
ould be
Mesos/Marathon, Docker Swarm, etc. the only important thing is for each
pod to know where to find zookeeper.
-Nick
*From:* jason.pr...@windriver.com
*Sent:* January 11, 2017 7:19 PM
*To:* user@karaf.apache.org
*Reply-to:* user@karaf.apache.org
*Subject:* RE: karaf boot
This sounds very interes
@karaf.apache.org
Subject: RE: karaf boot
This sounds very interesting. Would the Dockers then be deployed similar to
VertX?
From: Nick Baker [mailto:nba...@pentaho.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 11:31 AM
To: user@karaf.apache.org
Subject: Re: karaf boot
Some background on what we've been playing
This sounds very interesting. Would the Dockers then be deployed similar to
VertX?
From: Nick Baker [mailto:nba...@pentaho.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 11:31 AM
To: user@karaf.apache.org
Subject: Re: karaf boot
Some background on what we've been playing with may be of use.
We've
I definitely like the direction of the Karaf Boot with the CDI, blueprint,
DS, etc. starters. Now if we could integrate that with the Karaf profiles
and have standardized Karaf Boot containers to configure like tinkertoys
we'd be there. I may work on some of that. I believe the synergy between
user@karaf.apache.org
Subject: Re: karaf boot
Sounds like you have a good case to validate karaf boot on.
Can you explain how you create your deployments now and what you are missing in
current karaf? Until now we only discussed internally about the scope and
requirements of karaf boot. It would b
Sounds like you have a good case to validate karaf boot on.
Can you explain how you create your deployments now and what you are
missing in current karaf? Until now we only discussed internally about
the scope and requirements of karaf boot. It would be very valuable to
get some input from
Hi guys,
that's really great and we are looking for help and ideas there !
The early stage branch is there:
https://github.com/jbonofre/karaf-boot
And this one contains also some PoC:
https://github.com/jbonofre/karaf-boot/tree/jpa
Regards
JB
On 01/11/2017 01:41 PM, Nick Baker wrote:
We'd
: user@karaf.apache.org
Reply-to: user@karaf.apache.org
Subject: RE: karaf boot
I'd be very interested in this project and will definitely give it a look.
I've been using the Karaf 4 static profiles to create compact microservices
containers and it works well. I'm not sure if that's what the Kara
I’d be very interested in this project and will definitely give it a look.
I’ve been using the Karaf 4 static profiles to create compact microservices
containers and it works well. I’m not sure if that’s what the Karaf Boot
project is aiming at since I haven’t had a chance to look at it yet
Hi Scott
There were a discussion in progress on the mailing list about Karaf boot.
A PoC branch is available on my GitHub in early stage.
I would like to restart the discussion based on this branch.
Regards
JB
On Jan 11, 2017, 02:25, at 02:25, Scott Lewis <sle...@composent.com>
The page about Karaf boot that I've found:
http://karaf.apache.org/projects.html#boot says 'not yet available'. Is
there an expected timeline for Karaf Boot? Also, is there a branch upon
which the Karaf boot work is being done?
Thannksinadvance,
Scott
28 matches
Mail list logo
