Am 22.09.15 um 08:36 schrieb Julian Sedding: > Maybe this is abit far fetched. I get the impression that we are (need to > be) moving from a "per artifact" towards a "deployment" paradigm.
I don't think this is far fetched. > > Approaches pioneered by crankstart and the provisioning model may become > desirable (as an option) for the installer. > > By specifying the desired deployment state in a provisioning model file, > the installer could make sure it has all required artifacts available (e.g. > local folder, maven repository, etc). Once that is the case it could > update/install/uninstall as it sees fit in order to attain the desired > system state. > > This would make the question of "update vs install" mute. Also this new > feature does not preclude the old behaviour. > > One open question, however, would be how partial deployments could be > controlled via provisioning model and the rest via the current mechanisms. > I think one nice way of dealing with this is to create subsystems out of a (partial) provisioning model and deploy these things as subsystems and let the subsystem implementation take care of it. Using subsystems has additional advantages as it would allow to further control the exports (and imports). We could also leverage the resolver spec: basically what you usually want is to deploy a certain feature which comes along as a plain bundle. But usually this bundle has requirements which might not be installed in the target platform yet. The resolver allows you to find out which additional bundles you would need to install. A subsystem could be created out of this as well. There are tons of things we could do and I think we have pretty good plans on what / how to do it. We just need to implement them :) Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler Adobe Research Switzerland [email protected]
