Hi Thilo 2010/1/28 Thilo Goetz <[email protected]>
> I've been thinking about this topic myself on and off > for a while. I think it doesn't make much sense to > create a UIMA core OSGi bundle without OSGi-enabling > UIMA itself. If you go the OSGi route, you want your > annotators to be bundles as well. So you need to add > the ability to UIMA to load annotator OSGi bundles. I > don't think that would be too hard to do, but I'm not > sure it can be done in ways that are completely backward > compatible. I would personally love to see OSGi bundles > replace our pear format. > > Anyway, these are just my thoughts. If there is > interest in really OSGiifying UIMA, that's something > I'd be interested in contributing to. > > --Thilo > I agree with your points indeed, in my opinion making all UIMA components OSGI bundles would be a real plus in the means of standards, distribution, interoperabilty and more. On the contrary it might be not so good to have this change for deploying stuff in a non-OSGI environment so we should think about having alternative "packagings" for (backward) compatibility (for example using maven profiles, but it's just the first thing that comes to my mind). More over it could perhaps bring one more dependency (Felix?) inside UIMA so it would be another drawback. An alternative would be having a UIMA OSGIfier for each of the UIMA base components but I don't like the idea very much and it could be a long way ... Thanks Thilo, I am interested in this OSGIfication, what do others think about it? Cheers, Tommaso
