Makes sense.. I didn't think declarative services were that much more lightweight since blueprint isn't very heavy.
A blueprint feature makes sense in that case since keeping karaf as light as possible is very important, but the compenium spec can still be satisfied with a blueprint feature. Makes sense.. are there any metrics on performance or runtime differences of the 2 DI technologies? On Mar 1, 2014 2:20 AM, "Christian Schneider" <[email protected]> wrote: > The idea is to replace blueprint with ds for karaf itself. > So the smallest version of karaf 4 will not include blueprint. > > Of course there will then be a blueprint feature so you can easily install > blueprint if you need it for your application. > So from a user point of view the main difference would be that you need to > depend on the blueprint service if you need it. > We will make sure to introduce the blueprint feature already in 3.x so you > can prepare for this early. > > Christian > > Am 01.03.2014 00:31, schrieb asookazian2: > >> Just read this post by James Strachan: >> >> Please verify if DS will replace blueprint in Karafe 4.x thx. >> >> http://java.dzone.com/articles/fabric8-jboss-fuse-and-apache >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble. >> com/Karaf-4-x-and-declarative-services-tp4032000.html >> Sent from the Karaf - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> > > > -- > Christian Schneider > http://www.liquid-reality.de > > Open Source Architect > Talend Application Integration Division http://www.talend.com > >
