You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@servicemix.apache.org by Michal <ca...@yahoo.com> on 2008/08/29 18:29:10 UTC
lwcontainer usage question
Hello,
I am wondering why lwcontainer is deprecated? is it going to be replaced by
anyth else? I think bean component cannot replace lw cause it doesn't have
following cool lwcontainer features:
- you can have all xml plumbing in one place (instead of having it in many
xbean files)
- each component is wrapped with jmx mbean which provides stop/start methods
- very cool feature which is not enabled for other artifacts: SUs,
endpoints.
Why would you discourage me from using lw?
What else I could use to still achieve above features without lw?
thanks
Michal
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/lwcontainer-usage-question-tp19223273p19223273.html
Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: R
Posted by Michal <ca...@yahoo.com>.
Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>
> Michal,
>
> For SMX3, we had a feature called static configuration, where you could
> put all the endpoints and message configuration in a servicemix.xml file
> and then start a container off that XML file. You couldn't dynamically
> deploy other services in that mode though. If you wanted dynamic
> deployment, you needed the WAR or standalone packaging variant of
> ServiceMix. This means you had to create JBI SU/SA and deploy those
> (if we forget about lwcontainer for a while, this means you'll end up
> with several xbean.xml files to hold the definitions).
>
>
How about if I create an xbean.xml file (SU hosted on a component X) and
extend its classloader to see other components - will I be able to run
endpoints on other components (other than X) defined in the same xbean file?
I am talking about this feature:
<classpath [inverse="true"]>
[<component>xxx</component>]*
</classpath>
If yes (this is possible) will it be still possible in SM4?
Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>
> Now, in SMX4, we will allow you to dynamically deploy the XML file
> itself. In the examples directory of a recent SMX4 SNAPSHOT, you'll
> find the simple/ directory, containing two xbean.xml files to hold the
> entire routing config (with servicemix-quartz, servicemix-scripting and
> camel endpoints defined in the same XML file). You can just put this
> XML file in the deploy directory. You can also package this XML file in
> an OSGi bundle (which is a simple JAR with some metadata in it), without
> having to resort to JBI packaging.
>
> Does this clarify what we have planned for SMX4?
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert
>
As you said I should look at the samples to get a better picture.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/lwcontainer-usage-question-tp19223273p19250272.html
Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
R
Posted by Gert Vanthienen <ge...@skynet.be>.
Michal,
Yes, this probably means that the servicemix-lwcontainer SU need some
kind of refactoring to get things working in SMX4 again. We should be
able to provide you with a migration guide of something to help you sort
it out. All other JBI components will be in ServiceMix 4 too (in fact,
we just split them into separate projects to ease this reuse of the
components between containers), so you will be able to take a SA out of
the hotdeploy directory in SMX3 and just put in SMX4 deploy.
For SMX3, we had a feature called static configuration, where you could
put all the endpoints and message configuration in a servicemix.xml file
and then start a container off that XML file. You couldn't dynamically
deploy other services in that mode though. If you wanted dynamic
deployment, you needed the WAR or standalone packaging variant of
ServiceMix. This means you had to create JBI SU/SA and deploy those
(if we forget about lwcontainer for a while, this means you'll end up
with several xbean.xml files to hold the definitions).
Now, in SMX4, we will allow you to dynamically deploy the XML file
itself. In the examples directory of a recent SMX4 SNAPSHOT, you'll
find the simple/ directory, containing two xbean.xml files to hold the
entire routing config (with servicemix-quartz, servicemix-scripting and
camel endpoints defined in the same XML file). You can just put this
XML file in the deploy directory. You can also package this XML file in
an OSGi bundle (which is a simple JAR with some metadata in it), without
having to resort to JBI packaging.
Does this clarify what we have planned for SMX4?
Regards,
Gert
Michal wrote:
>
>> However, we are not going to migrate the servicemix-lwcontainer to
>>
> SMX4.
>
> So it means that it will not work in SM4?
>
>
>> We will however support deploying a single XML file
>>
> containing the configuration for multiple JBI components.
>
> Is it smt new that appears in SM4 only or this feature already exists in
> SM3?
>
>
>
Re: lwcontainer usage question
Posted by Michal <ca...@yahoo.com>.
> However, we are not going to migrate the servicemix-lwcontainer to
SMX4.
So it means that it will not work in SM4?
> We will however support deploying a single XML file
containing the configuration for multiple JBI components.
Is it smt new that appears in SM4 only or this feature already exists in
SM3?
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/lwcontainer-usage-question-tp19223273p19244005.html
Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: lwcontainer usage question
Posted by Gert Vanthienen <ge...@skynet.be>.
Michal,
For SMX3, we don't have any plans to actually remove the
servicemix-lwcontainer functionality so you can still keep on using it
and the lightweight components if you like this.
However, we are not going to migrate the servicemix-lwcontainer to
SMX4. Most of the lightweight components have now been made available
as JBI components. We will however support deploying a single XML file
containing the configuration for multiple JBI components. You can
deploy the plain XML file itself or you can add it to an OSGi bundle and
deploy that. This will give you the benefits of both: the use of
standard JBI components as well as ease of development/deployment.
For some components, we even go one step further. An example: in SMX4
we will be able to support deployment of plain Camel routes or CXF web
services, that can still interact with other services on the ESB.
Regards,
Gert
Michal wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am wondering why lwcontainer is deprecated? is it going to be replaced by
> anyth else? I think bean component cannot replace lw cause it doesn't have
> following cool lwcontainer features:
> - you can have all xml plumbing in one place (instead of having it in many
> xbean files)
> - each component is wrapped with jmx mbean which provides stop/start methods
> - very cool feature which is not enabled for other artifacts: SUs,
> endpoints.
>
> Why would you discourage me from using lw?
> What else I could use to still achieve above features without lw?
>
> thanks
> Michal
>
>