You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cxf.apache.org by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> on 2007/09/20 13:47:36 UTC
OSGi bundles (was Re: Architecture of cxf)
Btw, what's the plan for OSGifying CXF ?
I've read it was planned for 2.1, but it seems it has not been done yet.
On 9/20/07, Tully, Gary <Ga...@iona.com> wrote:
> Hi Dan,
> When looking at CXF from an OSGi bundle perspective the duplication of
> packages between api and implementation limits the modularity. Both
> interface and implementation are available to dependants by default.
>
> Would we consider adding an .impl to the implementation package names in
> CXF.
>
> org.apache.cxf.interceptor.Inerceptor
> org.apache.cxf.interceptor.impl.BareInInterceptor
>
> This would help Message.properties also.
>
> Best Regards,
> Gary.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dkulp@apache.org]
> > Sent: 20 September 2007 01:48
> > To: cxf-user@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc: Christian Schneider
> > Subject: Re: Architecture of cxf
> >
> >
> > We have a few places where package names exist in both the API jar as
> > well as in the rt-* jars. This may be causing some issues with the
> > analysis. They CERTAINLY have caused issues with the i18n
> > stuff as grabbing the Message.properties seems to grab
> > whichever is in the
> > classpath first. Definitely something I'd like to see cleaned up.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday 19 September 2007, Christian Schneider wrote:
> > > I have done a second try at displaying the architecture.
> > This time I
> > > only included the cxf-rt* jars in the model.
> > > This looks much better already ;-) Any idea why inlcuding the other
> > > jars especially the api jar gave me so many cycles?
> > >
> > > This architecture view below shows only some cycles.
> > >
> > > Best regards
> > >
> > > Christian Schneider
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > J. Daniel Kulp
> > Principal Engineer
> > IONA
> > P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
> > daniel.kulp@iona.com
> > http://www.dankulp.com/blog
> >
>
> ----------------------------
> IONA Technologies PLC (registered in Ireland)
> Registered Number: 171387
> Registered Address: The IONA Building, Shelbourne Road, Dublin 4, Ireland
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
Re: OSGi bundles (was Re: Architecture of cxf)
Posted by "d.santosh" <rs...@gmail.com>.
Just a quick input below, will add on later...
Sounds great and workable too.
If we can run down the the high level points that we may need to accomplish,
i can take the ownership and start working(or rather handed over to me by
Guillaume).
Currently getting into the depths of OSGi and a bit CXF so would be an
added advantage.
take care
Santosh R. Dubey
On 9/20/07, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'd rather have someone handle it.
> I've done quite a lot of OSGification of jars this week (smx 4, camel,
> activemq) and it's quite simple. The only problem as someone noticed
> is that OSGi deals with packages, not only jars. And one package is
> not really supposed to be exported by several bundles. Thus it
> requires some work to avoid a single package being used in different
> jars. Once this is done, adding the OSGi manifest entries is quite
> easy. It then requires someone with a deep knowledge of the code to
> mark some imports as optionals when neeeded.
>
> So once the refactoring is done, i'd be happy to help OSGifying CXF :-)
>
> On 9/20/07, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On Thursday 20 September 2007, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> > > Btw, what's the plan for OSGifying CXF ?
> > > I've read it was planned for 2.1, but it seems it has not been done
> > > yet.
> >
> > That's the point. It's on the roadmap for 2.1, but it's not done yet.
> > You volunteering? :-) Seriously, 2.1 is in VERY
> > early "investigative" stages (we're still trying to get 2.0.2 out the
> > door) so at this point, the roadmap is fairly high level with a lot of
> > details yet to be flushed out.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> >
> > > On 9/20/07, Tully, Gary <Ga...@iona.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi Dan,
> > > > When looking at CXF from an OSGi bundle perspective the duplication
> > > > of packages between api and implementation limits the modularity.
> > > > Both interface and implementation are available to dependants by
> > > > default.
> > > >
> > > > Would we consider adding an .impl to the implementation package
> > > > names in CXF.
> > > >
> > > > org.apache.cxf.interceptor.Inerceptor
> > > > org.apache.cxf.interceptor.impl.BareInInterceptor
> > > >
> > > > This would help Message.properties also.
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > Gary.
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dkulp@apache.org]
> > > > > Sent: 20 September 2007 01:48
> > > > > To: cxf-user@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > Cc: Christian Schneider
> > > > > Subject: Re: Architecture of cxf
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > We have a few places where package names exist in both the API jar
> > > > > as well as in the rt-* jars. This may be causing some issues
> > > > > with the analysis. They CERTAINLY have caused issues with the
> > > > > i18n stuff as grabbing the Message.properties seems to grab
> > > > > whichever is in the
> > > > > classpath first. Definitely something I'd like to see cleaned
> > > > > up.
> > > > >
> > > > > Dan
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wednesday 19 September 2007, Christian Schneider wrote:
> > > > > > I have done a second try at displaying the architecture.
> > > > >
> > > > > This time I
> > > > >
> > > > > > only included the cxf-rt* jars in the model.
> > > > > > This looks much better already ;-) Any idea why inlcuding the
> > > > > > other jars especially the api jar gave me so many cycles?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This architecture view below shows only some cycles.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best regards
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Christian Schneider
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > J. Daniel Kulp
> > > > > Principal Engineer
> > > > > IONA
> > > > > P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
> > > > > daniel.kulp@iona.com
> > > > > http://www.dankulp.com/blog
> > > >
> > > > ----------------------------
> > > > IONA Technologies PLC (registered in Ireland)
> > > > Registered Number: 171387
> > > > Registered Address: The IONA Building, Shelbourne Road, Dublin 4,
> > > > Ireland
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > J. Daniel Kulp
> > Principal Engineer
> > IONA
> > P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
> > daniel.kulp@iona.com
> > http://www.dankulp.com/blog
> >
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>
Re: OSGi bundles (was Re: Architecture of cxf)
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
I'd rather have someone handle it.
I've done quite a lot of OSGification of jars this week (smx 4, camel,
activemq) and it's quite simple. The only problem as someone noticed
is that OSGi deals with packages, not only jars. And one package is
not really supposed to be exported by several bundles. Thus it
requires some work to avoid a single package being used in different
jars. Once this is done, adding the OSGi manifest entries is quite
easy. It then requires someone with a deep knowledge of the code to
mark some imports as optionals when neeeded.
So once the refactoring is done, i'd be happy to help OSGifying CXF :-)
On 9/20/07, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thursday 20 September 2007, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> > Btw, what's the plan for OSGifying CXF ?
> > I've read it was planned for 2.1, but it seems it has not been done
> > yet.
>
> That's the point. It's on the roadmap for 2.1, but it's not done yet.
> You volunteering? :-) Seriously, 2.1 is in VERY
> early "investigative" stages (we're still trying to get 2.0.2 out the
> door) so at this point, the roadmap is fairly high level with a lot of
> details yet to be flushed out.
>
> Dan
>
>
> > On 9/20/07, Tully, Gary <Ga...@iona.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Dan,
> > > When looking at CXF from an OSGi bundle perspective the duplication
> > > of packages between api and implementation limits the modularity.
> > > Both interface and implementation are available to dependants by
> > > default.
> > >
> > > Would we consider adding an .impl to the implementation package
> > > names in CXF.
> > >
> > > org.apache.cxf.interceptor.Inerceptor
> > > org.apache.cxf.interceptor.impl.BareInInterceptor
> > >
> > > This would help Message.properties also.
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Gary.
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dkulp@apache.org]
> > > > Sent: 20 September 2007 01:48
> > > > To: cxf-user@incubator.apache.org
> > > > Cc: Christian Schneider
> > > > Subject: Re: Architecture of cxf
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > We have a few places where package names exist in both the API jar
> > > > as well as in the rt-* jars. This may be causing some issues
> > > > with the analysis. They CERTAINLY have caused issues with the
> > > > i18n stuff as grabbing the Message.properties seems to grab
> > > > whichever is in the
> > > > classpath first. Definitely something I'd like to see cleaned
> > > > up.
> > > >
> > > > Dan
> > > >
> > > > On Wednesday 19 September 2007, Christian Schneider wrote:
> > > > > I have done a second try at displaying the architecture.
> > > >
> > > > This time I
> > > >
> > > > > only included the cxf-rt* jars in the model.
> > > > > This looks much better already ;-) Any idea why inlcuding the
> > > > > other jars especially the api jar gave me so many cycles?
> > > > >
> > > > > This architecture view below shows only some cycles.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards
> > > > >
> > > > > Christian Schneider
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > J. Daniel Kulp
> > > > Principal Engineer
> > > > IONA
> > > > P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
> > > > daniel.kulp@iona.com
> > > > http://www.dankulp.com/blog
> > >
> > > ----------------------------
> > > IONA Technologies PLC (registered in Ireland)
> > > Registered Number: 171387
> > > Registered Address: The IONA Building, Shelbourne Road, Dublin 4,
> > > Ireland
>
>
>
> --
> J. Daniel Kulp
> Principal Engineer
> IONA
> P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
> daniel.kulp@iona.com
> http://www.dankulp.com/blog
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
Re: OSGi bundles (was Re: Architecture of cxf)
Posted by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>.
On Thursday 20 September 2007, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> Btw, what's the plan for OSGifying CXF ?
> I've read it was planned for 2.1, but it seems it has not been done
> yet.
That's the point. It's on the roadmap for 2.1, but it's not done yet.
You volunteering? :-) Seriously, 2.1 is in VERY
early "investigative" stages (we're still trying to get 2.0.2 out the
door) so at this point, the roadmap is fairly high level with a lot of
details yet to be flushed out.
Dan
> On 9/20/07, Tully, Gary <Ga...@iona.com> wrote:
> > Hi Dan,
> > When looking at CXF from an OSGi bundle perspective the duplication
> > of packages between api and implementation limits the modularity.
> > Both interface and implementation are available to dependants by
> > default.
> >
> > Would we consider adding an .impl to the implementation package
> > names in CXF.
> >
> > org.apache.cxf.interceptor.Inerceptor
> > org.apache.cxf.interceptor.impl.BareInInterceptor
> >
> > This would help Message.properties also.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Gary.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dkulp@apache.org]
> > > Sent: 20 September 2007 01:48
> > > To: cxf-user@incubator.apache.org
> > > Cc: Christian Schneider
> > > Subject: Re: Architecture of cxf
> > >
> > >
> > > We have a few places where package names exist in both the API jar
> > > as well as in the rt-* jars. This may be causing some issues
> > > with the analysis. They CERTAINLY have caused issues with the
> > > i18n stuff as grabbing the Message.properties seems to grab
> > > whichever is in the
> > > classpath first. Definitely something I'd like to see cleaned
> > > up.
> > >
> > > Dan
> > >
> > > On Wednesday 19 September 2007, Christian Schneider wrote:
> > > > I have done a second try at displaying the architecture.
> > >
> > > This time I
> > >
> > > > only included the cxf-rt* jars in the model.
> > > > This looks much better already ;-) Any idea why inlcuding the
> > > > other jars especially the api jar gave me so many cycles?
> > > >
> > > > This architecture view below shows only some cycles.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards
> > > >
> > > > Christian Schneider
> > >
> > > --
> > > J. Daniel Kulp
> > > Principal Engineer
> > > IONA
> > > P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
> > > daniel.kulp@iona.com
> > > http://www.dankulp.com/blog
> >
> > ----------------------------
> > IONA Technologies PLC (registered in Ireland)
> > Registered Number: 171387
> > Registered Address: The IONA Building, Shelbourne Road, Dublin 4,
> > Ireland
--
J. Daniel Kulp
Principal Engineer
IONA
P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
daniel.kulp@iona.com
http://www.dankulp.com/blog
Re: OSGi bundles (was Re: Architecture of cxf)
Posted by "d.santosh" <rs...@gmail.com>.
Looking at the structure and dependencies pointed (using structure101) i
would say it would be good to implement it.
+1
On 9/20/07, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Btw, what's the plan for OSGifying CXF ?
> I've read it was planned for 2.1, but it seems it has not been done yet.
>
> On 9/20/07, Tully, Gary <Ga...@iona.com> wrote:
> > Hi Dan,
> > When looking at CXF from an OSGi bundle perspective the duplication of
> > packages between api and implementation limits the modularity. Both
> > interface and implementation are available to dependants by default.
> >
> > Would we consider adding an .impl to the implementation package names in
> > CXF.
> >
> > org.apache.cxf.interceptor.Inerceptor
> > org.apache.cxf.interceptor.impl.BareInInterceptor
> >
> > This would help Message.properties also.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Gary.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dkulp@apache.org]
> > > Sent: 20 September 2007 01:48
> > > To: cxf-user@incubator.apache.org
> > > Cc: Christian Schneider
> > > Subject: Re: Architecture of cxf
> > >
> > >
> > > We have a few places where package names exist in both the API jar as
> > > well as in the rt-* jars. This may be causing some issues with the
> > > analysis. They CERTAINLY have caused issues with the i18n
> > > stuff as grabbing the Message.properties seems to grab
> > > whichever is in the
> > > classpath first. Definitely something I'd like to see cleaned up.
> > >
> > > Dan
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wednesday 19 September 2007, Christian Schneider wrote:
> > > > I have done a second try at displaying the architecture.
> > > This time I
> > > > only included the cxf-rt* jars in the model.
> > > > This looks much better already ;-) Any idea why inlcuding the other
> > > > jars especially the api jar gave me so many cycles?
> > > >
> > > > This architecture view below shows only some cycles.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards
> > > >
> > > > Christian Schneider
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > J. Daniel Kulp
> > > Principal Engineer
> > > IONA
> > > P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
> > > daniel.kulp@iona.com
> > > http://www.dankulp.com/blog
> > >
> >
> > ----------------------------
> > IONA Technologies PLC (registered in Ireland)
> > Registered Number: 171387
> > Registered Address: The IONA Building, Shelbourne Road, Dublin 4,
> Ireland
> >
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>