Subsystem Uber-Bundle (Was Re: [VOTE] subsystem-bundle 1.0.0)

[David Bosschaert <da...@gmail.com>]

The uber-bundle approach was always a way to get started quickly with OSGi
technologies that were comprised of a number of bundles, but they really
don't work well when you are combining multiple technologies in a single
OSGi framework, so people generally move off the uber-bundle once they
start doing something more serious.
Now that we have subsytems these provide a nice solution to this as they
keep the modularity of bundles intact, while providing the convenience of a
single deployable artifact (the .esa file). You get the simplicity of a
single deployable file without the disadvantages of a big monolithic bundle
- the best of both worlds really :)

So I guess all of the *other* projects that used to provide 'uber' bundles
should really start providing subsystems now instead.

That leaves the 'uber' bundle of the subsystems implementation itself. I
think there is value in having it as it speeds up getting started with
subsystems and you can't use .esa for this obviously, although I can
imagine that once people have more serious deployments that they would move
away from the subsystems uber-bundle and use the individual components
instead.

Anyway, just my thoughts.

Cheers,

David


On 18 April 2013 12:47, John W Ross <jw...@us.ibm.com> wrote:

>
> I created subsystem-bundle early in the process because I saw other
> components doing the same thing (e.g. blueprint and applications) and
> assumed it was either mandatory or considered a best practice. I
> subsequently realized, however, that these other components probably only
> did it because they consist of much more than two bundles. So, now I kind
> of regret creating something else to maintain :) But the cat is out of the
> bag and appears to be in demand, so I guess we're stuck with it.
>
> Perhaps there would be more value if it also included optional components
> like subsystem-obr?
>
> John
>
> >
> > Re: [VOTE] subsystem-bundle 1.0.0
> >
> > Thanks John. Was actually just playing with this component. I guess this
> > makes it easier to get started with subsystems, but I think in real
> > deployments people would probably be better off using the embedded
> > components by themselves. Would you agree?
> >
> > In any case, here's my +1 to releasing this component.
> >
> >
> > On 18 April 2013 10:55, John W Ross <jw...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > This is a vote for the release of subsystem-bundle 1.0.0, an uber
> bundle
> > > containing subsystem-api 1.0.0 and subsystem-core 1.0.0.
> > >
> > > Staging Area:
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-117/
> > >
> > > Tags:
> > >
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/aries/tags/org.apache.aries.subsystem-1.0.0/
> > >
> > > This vote will remain open for at least 72 hours.
> > >
> > > John
>