[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-2335?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17140497#comment-17140497
]
Ioan Eugen Stan commented on JAMES-2335:
----------------------------------------
I had my OSGi period and I think the technology has it's merits.
It really depends on your deployment scenario.
For me, working via docker and kubernetes - it currently does not make sens
since the images should be immutable.
I do see it as a way to dynamically load / unload extensions like mailets and
change the processing pipeline at runtime.
It could also be a nice addition to help with loading/unloading mailets /
extensions during development.
However, overall, in my use case of using docker and relying on the
immutability of the image to avoid operational issues, there is not much value.
In my particular use case, Java 9 modules are higher on the priority and
complementary to OSGi.
[~dleangen]: If you know something that I am missing, please let me know.
> Modernize James configuration
> -----------------------------
>
> Key: JAMES-2335
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-2335
> Project: James Server
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: configuration
> Reporter: Benoit Tellier
> Priority: Major
> Labels: feature, refactoring
>
> Apache James currently relies on commons-configuration, and thus on XML
> configuration files.
> As such the configuration process has several problems:
> - Working with XML is boiler plate
> - Working with file leads to a real lack of flexibility.
> - For instance, in a cluster environment, we would like all the James
> server to share the same configurations.
> - Also, in tests, we need to test the different configuration values.
> We can not do this without overwriting files, which is dangerous, and
> boilerplate.
> What we need is:
> - To represent all possible configuration via java objects.
> - Configuration providers should be able to convert the configuration stored
> into the java configuration object.
> - We should be able to inject different configuration providers from
> guice/spring.
> It would allow to specify alternative configuration backends (different
> formats, different storage techniques) and allow direct injection (for tests
> for instance).
> Here would be the steps for this work:
> - Add a *Initializable* class in *lifecycle-api*. This should be called by
> Guice and Sprint at initialization
> - *configure* in Configurable will save a Java object (parse the
> HierachicalConfiguration into a java object representing it's content).
> Initialization will then be done by *Initializable*.
> - Then we can move away, object by object, from the *Configurable*
> interface: We need to move the configuration parsing in a separated class
> (behind an interface). We can register *ConfigurationProviders*, with an
> XML/commons-configuration default implementation.
> - Deprecate *Configurable*.
> - Provide alternative configuration providers, for example, a Cassandra
> stored configuration provider
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscr...@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-h...@james.apache.org
