Felix is now a TLP

[Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org>]

Hi,

I know that the subject seems to be totally unrelated to ADS? but as a 
matter of fact, we have a dependency on this project, for ADS to be 
OSGi-able.

It leads to a problem for us as felix has exited the incubator 
yesturday, and for those who have tried to svn up their current trunks, 
it generates a failure.

It has now been fixed.

Now, we have discussed a lot about moving to OSGi, and it might be the 
perfect timing to think again about moving to it.

wdyt ?

Emmanuel

Re: Felix is now a TLP

[Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org>]

I don't know.  Did we find a resolution to the list of problems we discussed
a few months ago like for example the testing issues and community drive?

Alex

On 5/5/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I know that the subject seems to be totally unrelated to ADS? but as a
> matter of fact, we have a dependency on this project, for ADS to be
> OSGi-able.
>
> It leads to a problem for us as felix has exited the incubator
> yesturday, and for those who have tried to svn up their current trunks,
> it generates a failure.
>
> It has now been fixed.
>
> Now, we have discussed a lot about moving to OSGi, and it might be the
> perfect timing to think again about moving to it.
>
> wdyt ?
>
> Emmanuel
>

Re: Felix is now a TLP

[Ole Ersoy <ol...@gmail.com>]

It may be beneficial to
do new features and OSGi migration
in parallel, this way new features
are already OSGi compliant, which
means less work migrating them later.

This applies especially with respect
to the reworked RPM installer, which
I think would work like this (And I think
the approach is similar for other ADS
services and features, except for the commons-daemon part):

Bundles need to be created out of all dependencies that ADS
uses.

Then the "main" server class that starts ADS needs a Bundle
Activator class that is specified in its manifest.
This class has start and stop methods, so all of ADS's initialization
would take place in start, and cleanup in stop.

It also needs "Import-Package" properties for all its
direct dependencies, and if services have a corresponding
service interface the "Export-Package" needs to be added
to the manifest as well.  The same goes for all other
ADS direct and transitive dependencies.

So commons daemon would first start the OSGi container,
the container would load all the services, and the daemon
would then call methods on Felix that start and stop
ADS via ADS's activator class.

Cheers,
- Ole





Chris Custine wrote:
> I think this depends on the roadmap features and whether OSGi will be of 
> benefit in implementing them in the short term.  In the long term, I 
> think modularizing with OSGi will be a great benefit to ApacheDS.  In 
> the short term, I think it might be somewhat of a distraction and 
> require too many major changes all at one time.  I think it could be 
> done this way, but I think my personal opinion of it would be to 
> implement a new round of features first and then work on OSGi after the 
> first round...
> 
> Chris
> 
> On 5/5/07, *Emmanuel Lecharny* <elecharny@apache.org 
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> 
>     Hi,
> 
>     I know that the subject seems to be totally unrelated to ADS? but as a
>     matter of fact, we have a dependency on this project, for ADS to be
>     OSGi-able.
> 
>     It leads to a problem for us as felix has exited the incubator
>     yesturday, and for those who have tried to svn up their current trunks,
>     it generates a failure.
> 
>     It has now been fixed.
> 
>     Now, we have discussed a lot about moving to OSGi, and it might be the
>     perfect timing to think again about moving to it.
> 
>     wdyt ?
> 
>     Emmanuel
> 
> 

Re: Felix is now a TLP

[Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org>]

Chris,

I feel the same way.  However it will take some time for this list of
requirements that
Enrique posted a link to to be completed.  So while John and Enrique work on
that we can
continue to add as many features as possible.  Then when ready we can talk
about what
the effort will take and re-evaluate.  Does this sound reasonable?

Alex


On 5/7/07, Chris Custine <ch...@gmail.com> wro So I think we may
still be able
to merge efforts as things mature while continuing to add to the features of
Apache
te:
>
> I think this depends on the roadmap features and whether OSGi will be of
> benefit in implementing them in the short term.  In the long term, I think
> modularizing with OSGi will be a great benefit to ApacheDS.  In the short
> term, I think it might be somewhat of a distraction and require too many
> major changes all at one time.  I think it could be done this way, but I
> think my personal opinion of it would be to implement a new round of
> features first and then work on OSGi after the first round...
>
> Chris
>
> On 5/5/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I know that the subject seems to be totally unrelated to ADS? but as a
> > matter of fact, we have a dependency on this project, for ADS to be
> > OSGi-able.
> >
> > It leads to a problem for us as felix has exited the incubator
> > yesturday, and for those who have tried to svn up their current trunks,
> > it generates a failure.
> >
> > It has now been fixed.
> >
> > Now, we have discussed a lot about moving to OSGi, and it might be the
> > perfect timing to think again about moving to it.
> >
> > wdyt ?
> >
> > Emmanuel
> >
>
>

Re: [OSGi migration] was: Felix is now a TLP

[Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org>]

Yes agreed but I think if we handle some of the issues on that confluence
page
our vision will be clearer than it is now and we can properly evaluate this
technology.
At that point we'll see just how much overhead it will incur.

Alex

On 5/7/07, Ersin Er <er...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Although I think that OSGi is a cool stuff and we should adopt to it
> at some point, I don't think it's the right time at this point. Moving
> to OSGi is a big architectural change and it will effect many parts of
> the server. So we should all be involved in it. However we have more
> urgent matters now on our plate like Replication. I think the OSGi
> effort should continue in a sandbox and make sure that it will fit
> into the server smoothly. So I think we should wait until we clear our
> plates.
>
> Thanks.
>
> On 5/7/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Chris Custine a écrit :
> >
> > > I think this depends on the roadmap features and whether OSGi will be
> of
> > > benefit in implementing them in the short term.  In the long term, I
> > > think
> > > modularizing with OSGi will be a great benefit to ApacheDS.  In the
> short
> > > term, I think it might be somewhat of a distraction and require too
> many
> > > major changes all at one time.  I think it could be done this way, but
> I
> > > think my personal opinion of it would be to implement a new round of
> > > features first and then work on OSGi after the first round...
> >
> >
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > I hope your flight back to USA was just perfect !
> >
> > Enrique has set an almost perfect page about the OSGi effort, I think we
> > should dedicate as much possible time on this item if we decide to go
> > for it. John Colon and Enrique Rodriguez have started working on all
> > that, and we have slowed down their efforts (sorry about that John)
> > because of the 1.5.0 release we were planning.
> >
> > But now, I think as soon as all the issues listed by Enrique
> > (http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DIRxSRVx11/OSGi+and+ApacheDS
> )
> > are solved, we should be ready to move on.
> >
> > Enrique, what would be cool would be to add a page where you explain in
> > detail how to move to OSGi, with a sample based on a simple module (with
> > code and comments).
> >
> > Wdyt ?
> >
> > Emmanuel
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Ersin
>

Re: [OSGi migration] was: Felix is now a TLP

[Ersin Er <er...@gmail.com>]

Hi all,

Although I think that OSGi is a cool stuff and we should adopt to it
at some point, I don't think it's the right time at this point. Moving
to OSGi is a big architectural change and it will effect many parts of
the server. So we should all be involved in it. However we have more
urgent matters now on our plate like Replication. I think the OSGi
effort should continue in a sandbox and make sure that it will fit
into the server smoothly. So I think we should wait until we clear our
plates.

Thanks.

On 5/7/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> Chris Custine a écrit :
>
> > I think this depends on the roadmap features and whether OSGi will be of
> > benefit in implementing them in the short term.  In the long term, I
> > think
> > modularizing with OSGi will be a great benefit to ApacheDS.  In the short
> > term, I think it might be somewhat of a distraction and require too many
> > major changes all at one time.  I think it could be done this way, but I
> > think my personal opinion of it would be to implement a new round of
> > features first and then work on OSGi after the first round...
>
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> I hope your flight back to USA was just perfect !
>
> Enrique has set an almost perfect page about the OSGi effort, I think we
> should dedicate as much possible time on this item if we decide to go
> for it. John Colon and Enrique Rodriguez have started working on all
> that, and we have slowed down their efforts (sorry about that John)
> because of the 1.5.0 release we were planning.
>
> But now, I think as soon as all the issues listed by Enrique
> (http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DIRxSRVx11/OSGi+and+ApacheDS)
> are solved, we should be ready to move on.
>
> Enrique, what would be cool would be to add a page where you explain in
> detail how to move to OSGi, with a sample based on a simple module (with
> code and comments).
>
> Wdyt ?
>
> Emmanuel
>
>


-- 
Ersin

[OSGi migration] was: Felix is now a TLP

[Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org>]

Chris Custine a écrit :

> I think this depends on the roadmap features and whether OSGi will be of
> benefit in implementing them in the short term.  In the long term, I 
> think
> modularizing with OSGi will be a great benefit to ApacheDS.  In the short
> term, I think it might be somewhat of a distraction and require too many
> major changes all at one time.  I think it could be done this way, but I
> think my personal opinion of it would be to implement a new round of
> features first and then work on OSGi after the first round...


Hi Chris,

I hope your flight back to USA was just perfect !

Enrique has set an almost perfect page about the OSGi effort, I think we 
should dedicate as much possible time on this item if we decide to go 
for it. John Colon and Enrique Rodriguez have started working on all 
that, and we have slowed down their efforts (sorry about that John) 
because of the 1.5.0 release we were planning.

But now, I think as soon as all the issues listed by Enrique 
(http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DIRxSRVx11/OSGi+and+ApacheDS) 
are solved, we should be ready to move on.

Enrique, what would be cool would be to add a page where you explain in 
detail how to move to OSGi, with a sample based on a simple module (with 
code and comments).

Wdyt ?

Emmanuel

Re: Felix is now a TLP

[Chris Custine <ch...@gmail.com>]

I think this depends on the roadmap features and whether OSGi will be of
benefit in implementing them in the short term.  In the long term, I think
modularizing with OSGi will be a great benefit to ApacheDS.  In the short
term, I think it might be somewhat of a distraction and require too many
major changes all at one time.  I think it could be done this way, but I
think my personal opinion of it would be to implement a new round of
features first and then work on OSGi after the first round...

Chris

On 5/5/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I know that the subject seems to be totally unrelated to ADS? but as a
> matter of fact, we have a dependency on this project, for ADS to be
> OSGi-able.
>
> It leads to a problem for us as felix has exited the incubator
> yesturday, and for those who have tried to svn up their current trunks,
> it generates a failure.
>
> It has now been fixed.
>
> Now, we have discussed a lot about moving to OSGi, and it might be the
> perfect timing to think again about moving to it.
>
> wdyt ?
>
> Emmanuel
>

Re: Felix is now a TLP

[Enrique Rodriguez <en...@gmail.com>]

On 5/5/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...
> Now, we have discussed a lot about moving to OSGi, and it might be the
> perfect timing to think again about moving to it.
>
> wdyt ?

Graduation was one of many issues.  We have a list of items at:

http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DIRxSRVx11/OSGi+and+ApacheDS

I updated the table to note that Felix graduation occurred.

Enrique