You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@sling.apache.org by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> on 2007/12/17 10:33:56 UTC
[RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Hi,
I think microsling is now ready to become just a specific
configuration of Sling.
That would save us the extra work (and potential community
fragmentation) (and user indecision) (and fuzzy "marketing" message)
that comes with having two similar-but-still-different codebases.
I'm pretty sure we can graft the microsling stuff on Sling as a set of
OSGi bundles, without requiring any OSGi knowledge from beginners, and
keep microsling's ease of use, all of microsling's current features,
and the "testable in 15 minutes from scratch" requirement.
Empowering users to jump from simple microsling scripted stuff to
full-blown OSGi-based java modules, within the same framework and
webapp, sounds quite exciting to me.
WDYT?
-Bertrand, operating in Monday Morning's Wild Thinking Mode ;-)
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>.
+1 - Funny, I didn't read ths mail before I send mine (I spent the whole
weeking drafting it and now Bertrand beat me by ten minutes...)
Carsten
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think microsling is now ready to become just a specific
> configuration of Sling.
>
> That would save us the extra work (and potential community
> fragmentation) (and user indecision) (and fuzzy "marketing" message)
> that comes with having two similar-but-still-different codebases.
>
> I'm pretty sure we can graft the microsling stuff on Sling as a set of
> OSGi bundles, without requiring any OSGi knowledge from beginners, and
> keep microsling's ease of use, all of microsling's current features,
> and the "testable in 15 minutes from scratch" requirement.
>
> Empowering users to jump from simple microsling scripted stuff to
> full-blown OSGi-based java modules, within the same framework and
> webapp, sounds quite exciting to me.
>
> WDYT?
>
> -Bertrand, operating in Monday Morning's Wild Thinking Mode ;-)
>
--
Carsten Ziegeler
cziegeler@apache.org
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Dec 18, 2007 2:32 AM, <pi...@wasabicowboy.com> wrote:
> I guess I was thinking that microsling could be viewed as a simplified sling programming environment. ...
I agree with that, or maybe more precisely: microsling (once merged)
exposes the parts of Sling that are easiest to use and understand. But
those parts remain available in Sling, if they're activated.
> ...If so it could be viewed as just a sling bundle which provides script and other services to get people up and running quickly...
I don't think (the merged) microsling has to be a single OSGi bundle,
it will more probably be a collection of bundles, that is activated by
a default configuration that's invisible to beginners.
I'll branch this thread into a "microsling 2.0 requirements"
discussion now, so that we can clarify all this.
-Bertrand
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by pi...@wasabicowboy.com.
I guess I was thinking that microsling could be viewed as a simplified sling programming environment. If so it could be viewed as just a sling bundle which provides script and other services to get people up and running quickly.
Paddy
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
-----Original Message-----
From: Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 00:24:46
To:sling-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Probably not quite. If we intend microsling to be an entry level Sling,
we have to make sure, that every script and content used in microsling
may still be used in Sling. Therefore, I rather see microsling as a
pre-canned (stripped-down) Sling.
For example: Sling has a Configuration Admin Service and the Sling
console. microsling will contain neither of both (out of the box).
Actual extensibility of this stripped-down microsling may be documented
somewhere, but would be of no issue to users of microsling.
We should not forget one thing: microsling is a single project
containing (almost) anything, where as Sling (and the new microsling or
minisling or whatever) will also be built out of multiple projects. I
don't think this is an issues because when we can launch the new
microsling easily, the internals are not really important as long as we
can connect with WebDAV and simply add scripts and data....
Regards
Felix
Am Montag, den 17.12.2007, 15:10 -0800 schrieb Padraic Hannon:
> So for a microsling application project one would just use a different
> configuration for the DefaultServlet? Could this be handled via
> resource types? Using something like a microsling base node type for
> application resources (this just popped into my head and could be
> silly)? Integrating WebDAV as a bundle would be nice to have in
> general, all in all this sounds like a nice direction that would
> simplify explaining what is going on and allow for a more focused
> development effort as it seems that people tend to work on sling or
> microsling then they are faced with porting that into the other project.
>
> -paddy
>
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 3:02 PM, Felix Meschberger wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Agreed. About the only two differences I actually see between Sling
> > and
> > microsling are:
> >
> > * Full-Blown and powerfull DefaultServlet (ujax amongst other
> > things)
> > * very simple setup/startup
> >
> > The first issue may probably easily be "ported" to Sling in a separate
> > DefaultServelt project. The basis for a flexible DefaultServlet is
> > provided by ServletResolver of the sling/core project.
> >
> > The second issue is actually not really a big one: The launcher folder
> > contains two projects app and webapp. The app project is a project
> > setup
> > to launch Sling from the command line. This may easily be extended to
> > include all required bundles to run Sling (or a minimal subset).
> >
> > The launcher/webapp project is just an extension of the launcher/app
> > project wrapping it in a web application archive instead of a
> > standalone
> > application. I think, for a quick 15minutes test, a standalone java
> > application packed in a single exectuable JAR file is much easier to
> > use
> > than a web application ...
> >
> > So, basically, all is there in Sling to build such a thing.
> >
> > ... The only thing missing is WebDAV: I think, if we could integrate
> > this also as a Bundle, we could have a single application jar file
> > being
> > able to launch Sling with a repo and WebDAV and initial content if
> > requireed etc.
> >
> > WDYT ?
> >
> > Regards
> > Felix
> >
> > Am Montag, den 17.12.2007, 10:33 +0100 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I think microsling is now ready to become just a specific
> >> configuration of Sling.
> >>
> >> That would save us the extra work (and potential community
> >> fragmentation) (and user indecision) (and fuzzy "marketing" message)
> >> that comes with having two similar-but-still-different codebases.
> >>
> >> I'm pretty sure we can graft the microsling stuff on Sling as a set
> >> of
> >> OSGi bundles, without requiring any OSGi knowledge from beginners,
> >> and
> >> keep microsling's ease of use, all of microsling's current features,
> >> and the "testable in 15 minutes from scratch" requirement.
> >>
> >> Empowering users to jump from simple microsling scripted stuff to
> >> full-blown OSGi-based java modules, within the same framework and
> >> webapp, sounds quite exciting to me.
> >>
> >> WDYT?
> >>
> >> -Bertrand, operating in Monday Morning's Wild Thinking Mode ;-)
>
>
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Dec 18, 2007 2:19 PM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...Just build the launcher/app project with the "full" profile. You get a
> huge (currently 10MB) executable jar file enclosing all bundles to
> launche Sling:
>
> $ mvn -P full package
> $ java -jar
> target/org.apache.sling.launcher.app-2.0.0-incubator-SNAPSHOT-full.jar...
Thanks for the reminder, works for me by navigating to
http://localhost:8080/sling once the webapp starts.
-Bertrand
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
Am Dienstag, den 18.12.2007, 14:04 +0100 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz:
> I agree that it's not a problem, provided we deliver an easy to start
> single jar (or single zip file to expand before running) for
> microsling.
Good news is, that this has been possible in Sling for a long time :-)
Just build the launcher/app project with the "full" profile. You get a
huge (currently 10MB) executable jar file enclosing all bundles to
launche Sling:
$ mvn -P full package
$ java -jar
target/org.apache.sling.launcher.app-2.0.0-incubator-SNAPSHOT-full.jar
To get help on command line options add the "-h" command line option, as
in :
$ java -jar
target/org.apache.sling.launcher.app-2.0.0-incubator-SNAPSHOT-full.jar
-h
Regards
Felix
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Dec 18, 2007 12:24 AM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...I rather see microsling as a
> pre-canned (stripped-down) Sling...
I agree with microsling being "Sling in a smaller box", but I don't
think it is stripped down: if we merge microsling into Sling, all
Sling features remain available by activating/configuring/installing
them via OSGi bundles.
The only difference is that, when starting with microsling, people
don't need to know about all these nice features.
It's like the fast car with the "yes son you can drive it" green key
that gives you only 80HP - if someone gives you the red unlimited key,
it's all in there already. In our case, the red key consists of some
OSGi bundles that can be installed in microsling, in a way that allows
people to pick and choose features that they need and understand.
> ...Actual extensibility of this stripped-down microsling may be documented
> somewhere, but would be of no issue to users of microsling...
Agreed, but (once we merge) it's the same software, and that's the
important point.
>... We should not forget one thing: microsling is a single project
> containing (almost) anything, where as Sling (and the new microsling or
> minisling or whatever) will also be built out of multiple projects. I
> don't think this is an issues because when we can launch the new
> microsling easily, the internals are not really important as long as we
> can connect with WebDAV and simply add scripts and data....
By "multiple projects" you mean multiple Maven modules, right?
I agree that it's not a problem, provided we deliver an easy to start
single jar (or single zip file to expand before running) for
microsling.
-Bertrand
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com>.
Probably not quite. If we intend microsling to be an entry level Sling,
we have to make sure, that every script and content used in microsling
may still be used in Sling. Therefore, I rather see microsling as a
pre-canned (stripped-down) Sling.
For example: Sling has a Configuration Admin Service and the Sling
console. microsling will contain neither of both (out of the box).
Actual extensibility of this stripped-down microsling may be documented
somewhere, but would be of no issue to users of microsling.
We should not forget one thing: microsling is a single project
containing (almost) anything, where as Sling (and the new microsling or
minisling or whatever) will also be built out of multiple projects. I
don't think this is an issues because when we can launch the new
microsling easily, the internals are not really important as long as we
can connect with WebDAV and simply add scripts and data....
Regards
Felix
Am Montag, den 17.12.2007, 15:10 -0800 schrieb Padraic Hannon:
> So for a microsling application project one would just use a different
> configuration for the DefaultServlet? Could this be handled via
> resource types? Using something like a microsling base node type for
> application resources (this just popped into my head and could be
> silly)? Integrating WebDAV as a bundle would be nice to have in
> general, all in all this sounds like a nice direction that would
> simplify explaining what is going on and allow for a more focused
> development effort as it seems that people tend to work on sling or
> microsling then they are faced with porting that into the other project.
>
> -paddy
>
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 3:02 PM, Felix Meschberger wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Agreed. About the only two differences I actually see between Sling
> > and
> > microsling are:
> >
> > * Full-Blown and powerfull DefaultServlet (ujax amongst other
> > things)
> > * very simple setup/startup
> >
> > The first issue may probably easily be "ported" to Sling in a separate
> > DefaultServelt project. The basis for a flexible DefaultServlet is
> > provided by ServletResolver of the sling/core project.
> >
> > The second issue is actually not really a big one: The launcher folder
> > contains two projects app and webapp. The app project is a project
> > setup
> > to launch Sling from the command line. This may easily be extended to
> > include all required bundles to run Sling (or a minimal subset).
> >
> > The launcher/webapp project is just an extension of the launcher/app
> > project wrapping it in a web application archive instead of a
> > standalone
> > application. I think, for a quick 15minutes test, a standalone java
> > application packed in a single exectuable JAR file is much easier to
> > use
> > than a web application ...
> >
> > So, basically, all is there in Sling to build such a thing.
> >
> > ... The only thing missing is WebDAV: I think, if we could integrate
> > this also as a Bundle, we could have a single application jar file
> > being
> > able to launch Sling with a repo and WebDAV and initial content if
> > requireed etc.
> >
> > WDYT ?
> >
> > Regards
> > Felix
> >
> > Am Montag, den 17.12.2007, 10:33 +0100 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I think microsling is now ready to become just a specific
> >> configuration of Sling.
> >>
> >> That would save us the extra work (and potential community
> >> fragmentation) (and user indecision) (and fuzzy "marketing" message)
> >> that comes with having two similar-but-still-different codebases.
> >>
> >> I'm pretty sure we can graft the microsling stuff on Sling as a set
> >> of
> >> OSGi bundles, without requiring any OSGi knowledge from beginners,
> >> and
> >> keep microsling's ease of use, all of microsling's current features,
> >> and the "testable in 15 minutes from scratch" requirement.
> >>
> >> Empowering users to jump from simple microsling scripted stuff to
> >> full-blown OSGi-based java modules, within the same framework and
> >> webapp, sounds quite exciting to me.
> >>
> >> WDYT?
> >>
> >> -Bertrand, operating in Monday Morning's Wild Thinking Mode ;-)
>
>
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by Padraic Hannon <pi...@wasabicowboy.com>.
So for a microsling application project one would just use a different
configuration for the DefaultServlet? Could this be handled via
resource types? Using something like a microsling base node type for
application resources (this just popped into my head and could be
silly)? Integrating WebDAV as a bundle would be nice to have in
general, all in all this sounds like a nice direction that would
simplify explaining what is going on and allow for a more focused
development effort as it seems that people tend to work on sling or
microsling then they are faced with porting that into the other project.
-paddy
On Dec 17, 2007, at 3:02 PM, Felix Meschberger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Agreed. About the only two differences I actually see between Sling
> and
> microsling are:
>
> * Full-Blown and powerfull DefaultServlet (ujax amongst other
> things)
> * very simple setup/startup
>
> The first issue may probably easily be "ported" to Sling in a separate
> DefaultServelt project. The basis for a flexible DefaultServlet is
> provided by ServletResolver of the sling/core project.
>
> The second issue is actually not really a big one: The launcher folder
> contains two projects app and webapp. The app project is a project
> setup
> to launch Sling from the command line. This may easily be extended to
> include all required bundles to run Sling (or a minimal subset).
>
> The launcher/webapp project is just an extension of the launcher/app
> project wrapping it in a web application archive instead of a
> standalone
> application. I think, for a quick 15minutes test, a standalone java
> application packed in a single exectuable JAR file is much easier to
> use
> than a web application ...
>
> So, basically, all is there in Sling to build such a thing.
>
> ... The only thing missing is WebDAV: I think, if we could integrate
> this also as a Bundle, we could have a single application jar file
> being
> able to launch Sling with a repo and WebDAV and initial content if
> requireed etc.
>
> WDYT ?
>
> Regards
> Felix
>
> Am Montag, den 17.12.2007, 10:33 +0100 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think microsling is now ready to become just a specific
>> configuration of Sling.
>>
>> That would save us the extra work (and potential community
>> fragmentation) (and user indecision) (and fuzzy "marketing" message)
>> that comes with having two similar-but-still-different codebases.
>>
>> I'm pretty sure we can graft the microsling stuff on Sling as a set
>> of
>> OSGi bundles, without requiring any OSGi knowledge from beginners,
>> and
>> keep microsling's ease of use, all of microsling's current features,
>> and the "testable in 15 minutes from scratch" requirement.
>>
>> Empowering users to jump from simple microsling scripted stuff to
>> full-blown OSGi-based java modules, within the same framework and
>> webapp, sounds quite exciting to me.
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>> -Bertrand, operating in Monday Morning's Wild Thinking Mode ;-)
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
Agreed. About the only two differences I actually see between Sling and
microsling are:
* Full-Blown and powerfull DefaultServlet (ujax amongst other things)
* very simple setup/startup
The first issue may probably easily be "ported" to Sling in a separate
DefaultServelt project. The basis for a flexible DefaultServlet is
provided by ServletResolver of the sling/core project.
The second issue is actually not really a big one: The launcher folder
contains two projects app and webapp. The app project is a project setup
to launch Sling from the command line. This may easily be extended to
include all required bundles to run Sling (or a minimal subset).
The launcher/webapp project is just an extension of the launcher/app
project wrapping it in a web application archive instead of a standalone
application. I think, for a quick 15minutes test, a standalone java
application packed in a single exectuable JAR file is much easier to use
than a web application ...
So, basically, all is there in Sling to build such a thing.
... The only thing missing is WebDAV: I think, if we could integrate
this also as a Bundle, we could have a single application jar file being
able to launch Sling with a repo and WebDAV and initial content if
requireed etc.
WDYT ?
Regards
Felix
Am Montag, den 17.12.2007, 10:33 +0100 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz:
> Hi,
>
> I think microsling is now ready to become just a specific
> configuration of Sling.
>
> That would save us the extra work (and potential community
> fragmentation) (and user indecision) (and fuzzy "marketing" message)
> that comes with having two similar-but-still-different codebases.
>
> I'm pretty sure we can graft the microsling stuff on Sling as a set of
> OSGi bundles, without requiring any OSGi knowledge from beginners, and
> keep microsling's ease of use, all of microsling's current features,
> and the "testable in 15 minutes from scratch" requirement.
>
> Empowering users to jump from simple microsling scripted stuff to
> full-blown OSGi-based java modules, within the same framework and
> webapp, sounds quite exciting to me.
>
> WDYT?
>
> -Bertrand, operating in Monday Morning's Wild Thinking Mode ;-)
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by pi...@wasabicowboy.com.
I think this is a great idea!
Paddy
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
-----Original Message-----
From: "Bertrand Delacretaz" <bd...@apache.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 10:33:56
To:sling-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Hi,
I think microsling is now ready to become just a specific
configuration of Sling.
That would save us the extra work (and potential community
fragmentation) (and user indecision) (and fuzzy "marketing" message)
that comes with having two similar-but-still-different codebases.
I'm pretty sure we can graft the microsling stuff on Sling as a set of
OSGi bundles, without requiring any OSGi knowledge from beginners, and
keep microsling's ease of use, all of microsling's current features,
and the "testable in 15 minutes from scratch" requirement.
Empowering users to jump from simple microsling scripted stuff to
full-blown OSGi-based java modules, within the same framework and
webapp, sounds quite exciting to me.
WDYT?
-Bertrand, operating in Monday Morning's Wild Thinking Mode ;-)
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>.
Torgeir Veimo wrote:
>
> On 17 Dec 2007, at 20:03, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
>>> ...Would this enable microsling to run without any OSGi framework at
>>> all?...
>>
>> No, but as Carsten says in his "synchronicity" email (we didn't talk
>> about that off-list before, honest ;-), the Apache Felix OSGi runtime
>> is quite small, and starts very quickly.
>
>
> But there are still issues for those that still need to be able to
> deploy into tomcat, if OSGi is required?
No, you can deploy an OSGi based webapp in any servlet engine - and of
course
this works with Sling as well. You'll find a sample in the sling
launcher/webapp project. You can deploy the resulting webapp into Tomcat.
Carsten
--
Carsten Ziegeler
cziegeler@apache.org
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 12/17/07, Torgeir Veimo <to...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> On 17 Dec 2007, at 20:03, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
> >> ...Would this enable microsling to run without any OSGi framework
> >> at all?...
> >
> > No, but as Carsten says in his "synchronicity" email (we didn't talk
> > about that off-list before, honest ;-), the Apache Felix OSGi runtime
> > is quite small, and starts very quickly.
>
>
> But there are still issues for those that still need to be able to
> deploy into tomcat, if OSGi is required?
What issues would that be?
regards,
Karl
> --
> Torgeir Veimo
> torgeir@pobox.com
>
>
>
>
--
Karl Pauls
karlpauls@gmail.com
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by Torgeir Veimo <to...@pobox.com>.
On 17 Dec 2007, at 20:03, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>> ...Would this enable microsling to run without any OSGi framework
>> at all?...
>
> No, but as Carsten says in his "synchronicity" email (we didn't talk
> about that off-list before, honest ;-), the Apache Felix OSGi runtime
> is quite small, and starts very quickly.
But there are still issues for those that still need to be able to
deploy into tomcat, if OSGi is required?
--
Torgeir Veimo
torgeir@pobox.com
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Dec 17, 2007 10:55 AM, Torgeir Veimo <to...@pobox.com> wrote:
> ...Would this enable microsling to run without any OSGi framework at all?...
No, but as Carsten says in his "synchronicity" email (we didn't talk
about that off-list before, honest ;-), the Apache Felix OSGi runtime
is quite small, and starts very quickly.
Also, it would be one of my requirements to make OSGi invisible to
beginners, and make it as easy to start playing with Sling as it is
with microsling now [1].
So I don't think OSGi would make a difference for microsling users.
-Bertrand
[1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/sling/trunk/microsling/microsling-standalone/
Re: [RT] Shall we merge microsling into Sling?
Posted by Torgeir Veimo <to...@pobox.com>.
On 17 Dec 2007, at 19:33, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
> I think microsling is now ready to become just a specific
> configuration of Sling.
>
> I'm pretty sure we can graft the microsling stuff on Sling as a set of
> OSGi bundles, without requiring any OSGi knowledge from beginners, and
> keep microsling's ease of use, all of microsling's current features,
> and the "testable in 15 minutes from scratch" requirement.
>
> Empowering users to jump from simple microsling scripted stuff to
> full-blown OSGi-based java modules, within the same framework and
> webapp, sounds quite exciting to me.
>
> WDYT?
Would this enable microsling to run without any OSGi framework at all?
--
Torgeir Veimo
torgeir@pobox.com