You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@karaf.apache.org by David Jencks <DA...@YAHOO.COM> on 2011/03/05 02:02:25 UTC
Moving features jaxb tree to features core
I spent a little time moving the jaxb tree for features.xml into features core and getting it to work with features core. (and then a lot of time trying to figure out how to get it onto my github branch. I think it's on the "master" branch at https://github.com/djencks/karaf/branches)
I have a few questions.
1. Why are the feature structure interfaces (Feature, BundleInfo, etc) exported from feature core at all?
2. If they really need to be exported, is there a good reason to use interfaces rather than the jaxb classes?
3. The schema allows 0..unbounded details elements since its an optional member of a choice group. The original classes only allow one detail. I guess we want to only allow one detail element?
4. There's only one Feature interface for both a complete feature (top level in features element ) and a dependency feature inside a feature element. The second one is more of a feature-ref since it doesn't have any actual contents for the feature. I think it might be reasonable to have two interfaces so as to distinguish these more easily.
Does anyone want to review this or should I just go ahead and commit it?
thanks
david jencks
Re: Moving features jaxb tree to features core
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
OK, 3 and 4 done in r1080060
thanks!
david jencks
On Mar 8, 2011, at 11:08 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> I think for #4 it would make sense to use two interfaces.
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 01:58, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I went ahead and committed this, let me know if there are any problems. It works fine for me so far....
>>
>> I found the answer to (1) and (2) (feature event exports them) I think.... haven't had time to update for (3) and I'm still wondering about (4).
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>> On Mar 4, 2011, at 5:02 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>>
>>> I spent a little time moving the jaxb tree for features.xml into features core and getting it to work with features core. (and then a lot of time trying to figure out how to get it onto my github branch. I think it's on the "master" branch at https://github.com/djencks/karaf/branches)
>>>
>>> I have a few questions.
>>>
>>> 1. Why are the feature structure interfaces (Feature, BundleInfo, etc) exported from feature core at all?
>>>
>>> 2. If they really need to be exported, is there a good reason to use interfaces rather than the jaxb classes?
>>>
>>> 3. The schema allows 0..unbounded details elements since its an optional member of a choice group. The original classes only allow one detail. I guess we want to only allow one detail element?
>>>
>>> 4. There's only one Feature interface for both a complete feature (top level in features element ) and a dependency feature inside a feature element. The second one is more of a feature-ref since it doesn't have any actual contents for the feature. I think it might be reasonable to have two interfaces so as to distinguish these more easily.
>>>
>>> Does anyone want to review this or should I just go ahead and commit it?
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
Re: Moving features jaxb tree to features core
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
I modified the generated classes, and also generated them from a modified schema (mostly changing the choice to a sequence).
Openejb has been maintaining a customized jaxb tree for all the javaee spec xsds for years, and it's not that much work. It's a lot less work that trying to keep the maven jaxb compiler plugin working :-).
thanks
david jencks
On Mar 9, 2011, at 2:15 AM, Łukasz Dywicki wrote:
> Hi All,
> The package org.karaf.feature.core.internal.model might be generated and
> don't need to be stored in svn. This package will double changes related
> with XML Schema - we'll have to maintain classes and XML schema, with
> generated code we must maintain only schema.
>
> Best regards,
> Lukasz
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Achim Nierbeck [mailto:bcanhome@googlemail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 10:17 AM
> To: dev@karaf.apache.org
> Cc: Andreas Pieber; Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> Subject: Re: Moving features jaxb tree to features core
>
> Also +1 for two interfaces
>
> 2011/3/9 Andreas Pieber <an...@gmail.com>:
>> Also +1 for the two interfaces
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
>>> Agree for the two interfaces.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 03/09/2011 08:08 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think for #4 it would make sense to use two interfaces.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 01:58, David Jencks<da...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I went ahead and committed this, let me know if there are any problems.
>>>>> It works fine for me so far....
>>>>>
>>>>> I found the answer to (1) and (2) (feature event exports them) I
>>>>> think.... haven't had time to update for (3) and I'm still wondering
> about
>>>>> (4).
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks
>>>>> david jencks
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 4, 2011, at 5:02 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I spent a little time moving the jaxb tree for features.xml into
>>>>>> features core and getting it to work with features core. (and then a
> lot of
>>>>>> time trying to figure out how to get it onto my github branch. I
> think it's
>>>>>> on the "master" branch at https://github.com/djencks/karaf/branches)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a few questions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. Why are the feature structure interfaces (Feature, BundleInfo, etc)
>>>>>> exported from feature core at all?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. If they really need to be exported, is there a good reason to use
>>>>>> interfaces rather than the jaxb classes?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3. The schema allows 0..unbounded details elements since its an
> optional
>>>>>> member of a choice group. The original classes only allow one detail.
> I
>>>>>> guess we want to only allow one detail element?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4. There's only one Feature interface for both a complete feature (top
>>>>>> level in features element ) and a dependency feature inside a feature
>>>>>> element. The second one is more of a feature-ref since it doesn't
> have any
>>>>>> actual contents for the feature. I think it might be reasonable to
> have two
>>>>>> interfaces so as to distinguish these more easily.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does anyone want to review this or should I just go ahead and commit
> it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> thanks
>>>>>> david jencks
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
RE: Moving features jaxb tree to features core
Posted by Łukasz Dywicki <lu...@code-house.org>.
Hi All,
The package org.karaf.feature.core.internal.model might be generated and
don't need to be stored in svn. This package will double changes related
with XML Schema - we'll have to maintain classes and XML schema, with
generated code we must maintain only schema.
Best regards,
Lukasz
-----Original Message-----
From: Achim Nierbeck [mailto:bcanhome@googlemail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 10:17 AM
To: dev@karaf.apache.org
Cc: Andreas Pieber; Jean-Baptiste Onofré
Subject: Re: Moving features jaxb tree to features core
Also +1 for two interfaces
2011/3/9 Andreas Pieber <an...@gmail.com>:
> Also +1 for the two interfaces
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
wrote:
>> Agree for the two interfaces.
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 03/09/2011 08:08 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>>
>>> I think for #4 it would make sense to use two interfaces.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 01:58, David Jencks<da...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I went ahead and committed this, let me know if there are any problems.
>>>> It works fine for me so far....
>>>>
>>>> I found the answer to (1) and (2) (feature event exports them) I
>>>> think.... haven't had time to update for (3) and I'm still wondering
about
>>>> (4).
>>>>
>>>> thanks
>>>> david jencks
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 4, 2011, at 5:02 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I spent a little time moving the jaxb tree for features.xml into
>>>>> features core and getting it to work with features core. (and then a
lot of
>>>>> time trying to figure out how to get it onto my github branch. I
think it's
>>>>> on the "master" branch at https://github.com/djencks/karaf/branches)
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a few questions.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Why are the feature structure interfaces (Feature, BundleInfo, etc)
>>>>> exported from feature core at all?
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. If they really need to be exported, is there a good reason to use
>>>>> interfaces rather than the jaxb classes?
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. The schema allows 0..unbounded details elements since its an
optional
>>>>> member of a choice group. The original classes only allow one detail.
I
>>>>> guess we want to only allow one detail element?
>>>>>
>>>>> 4. There's only one Feature interface for both a complete feature (top
>>>>> level in features element ) and a dependency feature inside a feature
>>>>> element. The second one is more of a feature-ref since it doesn't
have any
>>>>> actual contents for the feature. I think it might be reasonable to
have two
>>>>> interfaces so as to distinguish these more easily.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone want to review this or should I just go ahead and commit
it?
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks
>>>>> david jencks
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Moving features jaxb tree to features core
Posted by Achim Nierbeck <bc...@googlemail.com>.
Also +1 for two interfaces
2011/3/9 Andreas Pieber <an...@gmail.com>:
> Also +1 for the two interfaces
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>> Agree for the two interfaces.
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 03/09/2011 08:08 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>>
>>> I think for #4 it would make sense to use two interfaces.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 01:58, David Jencks<da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I went ahead and committed this, let me know if there are any problems.
>>>> It works fine for me so far....
>>>>
>>>> I found the answer to (1) and (2) (feature event exports them) I
>>>> think.... haven't had time to update for (3) and I'm still wondering about
>>>> (4).
>>>>
>>>> thanks
>>>> david jencks
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 4, 2011, at 5:02 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I spent a little time moving the jaxb tree for features.xml into
>>>>> features core and getting it to work with features core. (and then a lot of
>>>>> time trying to figure out how to get it onto my github branch. I think it's
>>>>> on the "master" branch at https://github.com/djencks/karaf/branches)
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a few questions.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Why are the feature structure interfaces (Feature, BundleInfo, etc)
>>>>> exported from feature core at all?
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. If they really need to be exported, is there a good reason to use
>>>>> interfaces rather than the jaxb classes?
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. The schema allows 0..unbounded details elements since its an optional
>>>>> member of a choice group. The original classes only allow one detail. I
>>>>> guess we want to only allow one detail element?
>>>>>
>>>>> 4. There's only one Feature interface for both a complete feature (top
>>>>> level in features element ) and a dependency feature inside a feature
>>>>> element. The second one is more of a feature-ref since it doesn't have any
>>>>> actual contents for the feature. I think it might be reasonable to have two
>>>>> interfaces so as to distinguish these more easily.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone want to review this or should I just go ahead and commit it?
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks
>>>>> david jencks
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Moving features jaxb tree to features core
Posted by Andreas Pieber <an...@gmail.com>.
Also +1 for the two interfaces
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> Agree for the two interfaces.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 03/09/2011 08:08 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>
>> I think for #4 it would make sense to use two interfaces.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 01:58, David Jencks<da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I went ahead and committed this, let me know if there are any problems.
>>> It works fine for me so far....
>>>
>>> I found the answer to (1) and (2) (feature event exports them) I
>>> think.... haven't had time to update for (3) and I'm still wondering about
>>> (4).
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks
>>>
>>> On Mar 4, 2011, at 5:02 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>>>
>>>> I spent a little time moving the jaxb tree for features.xml into
>>>> features core and getting it to work with features core. (and then a lot of
>>>> time trying to figure out how to get it onto my github branch. I think it's
>>>> on the "master" branch at https://github.com/djencks/karaf/branches)
>>>>
>>>> I have a few questions.
>>>>
>>>> 1. Why are the feature structure interfaces (Feature, BundleInfo, etc)
>>>> exported from feature core at all?
>>>>
>>>> 2. If they really need to be exported, is there a good reason to use
>>>> interfaces rather than the jaxb classes?
>>>>
>>>> 3. The schema allows 0..unbounded details elements since its an optional
>>>> member of a choice group. The original classes only allow one detail. I
>>>> guess we want to only allow one detail element?
>>>>
>>>> 4. There's only one Feature interface for both a complete feature (top
>>>> level in features element ) and a dependency feature inside a feature
>>>> element. The second one is more of a feature-ref since it doesn't have any
>>>> actual contents for the feature. I think it might be reasonable to have two
>>>> interfaces so as to distinguish these more easily.
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone want to review this or should I just go ahead and commit it?
>>>>
>>>> thanks
>>>> david jencks
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Moving features jaxb tree to features core
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Agree for the two interfaces.
Regards
JB
On 03/09/2011 08:08 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> I think for #4 it would make sense to use two interfaces.
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 01:58, David Jencks<da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I went ahead and committed this, let me know if there are any problems. It works fine for me so far....
>>
>> I found the answer to (1) and (2) (feature event exports them) I think.... haven't had time to update for (3) and I'm still wondering about (4).
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>> On Mar 4, 2011, at 5:02 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>>
>>> I spent a little time moving the jaxb tree for features.xml into features core and getting it to work with features core. (and then a lot of time trying to figure out how to get it onto my github branch. I think it's on the "master" branch at https://github.com/djencks/karaf/branches)
>>>
>>> I have a few questions.
>>>
>>> 1. Why are the feature structure interfaces (Feature, BundleInfo, etc) exported from feature core at all?
>>>
>>> 2. If they really need to be exported, is there a good reason to use interfaces rather than the jaxb classes?
>>>
>>> 3. The schema allows 0..unbounded details elements since its an optional member of a choice group. The original classes only allow one detail. I guess we want to only allow one detail element?
>>>
>>> 4. There's only one Feature interface for both a complete feature (top level in features element ) and a dependency feature inside a feature element. The second one is more of a feature-ref since it doesn't have any actual contents for the feature. I think it might be reasonable to have two interfaces so as to distinguish these more easily.
>>>
>>> Does anyone want to review this or should I just go ahead and commit it?
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Re: Moving features jaxb tree to features core
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
I think for #4 it would make sense to use two interfaces.
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 01:58, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I went ahead and committed this, let me know if there are any problems. It works fine for me so far....
>
> I found the answer to (1) and (2) (feature event exports them) I think.... haven't had time to update for (3) and I'm still wondering about (4).
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Mar 4, 2011, at 5:02 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>
>> I spent a little time moving the jaxb tree for features.xml into features core and getting it to work with features core. (and then a lot of time trying to figure out how to get it onto my github branch. I think it's on the "master" branch at https://github.com/djencks/karaf/branches)
>>
>> I have a few questions.
>>
>> 1. Why are the feature structure interfaces (Feature, BundleInfo, etc) exported from feature core at all?
>>
>> 2. If they really need to be exported, is there a good reason to use interfaces rather than the jaxb classes?
>>
>> 3. The schema allows 0..unbounded details elements since its an optional member of a choice group. The original classes only allow one detail. I guess we want to only allow one detail element?
>>
>> 4. There's only one Feature interface for both a complete feature (top level in features element ) and a dependency feature inside a feature element. The second one is more of a feature-ref since it doesn't have any actual contents for the feature. I think it might be reasonable to have two interfaces so as to distinguish these more easily.
>>
>> Does anyone want to review this or should I just go ahead and commit it?
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Re: Moving features jaxb tree to features core
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
I went ahead and committed this, let me know if there are any problems. It works fine for me so far....
I found the answer to (1) and (2) (feature event exports them) I think.... haven't had time to update for (3) and I'm still wondering about (4).
thanks
david jencks
On Mar 4, 2011, at 5:02 PM, David Jencks wrote:
> I spent a little time moving the jaxb tree for features.xml into features core and getting it to work with features core. (and then a lot of time trying to figure out how to get it onto my github branch. I think it's on the "master" branch at https://github.com/djencks/karaf/branches)
>
> I have a few questions.
>
> 1. Why are the feature structure interfaces (Feature, BundleInfo, etc) exported from feature core at all?
>
> 2. If they really need to be exported, is there a good reason to use interfaces rather than the jaxb classes?
>
> 3. The schema allows 0..unbounded details elements since its an optional member of a choice group. The original classes only allow one detail. I guess we want to only allow one detail element?
>
> 4. There's only one Feature interface for both a complete feature (top level in features element ) and a dependency feature inside a feature element. The second one is more of a feature-ref since it doesn't have any actual contents for the feature. I think it might be reasonable to have two interfaces so as to distinguish these more easily.
>
> Does anyone want to review this or should I just go ahead and commit it?
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>