You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ace.apache.org by Steven Siebert <sm...@gmail.com> on 2010/11/04 22:08:20 UTC
Archiva interest in ACE (or: cross-pollinate opportunity for maven
repo OBR)?
All,
In previous discussions with Brett Porter (CC'ed) he I and I discussed
working together on exposing the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repo through
an OBR interface. In what we discussed this afternoon, I think there could
be an opportunity to cross-pollinate across the projects, just based on the
commonality (without looking at the code yet). I just spoke again to Brett,
and before I forget, I figured I would send an email out on the subject. =)
Regards,
Steve
Re: Archiva interest in ACE (or: cross-pollinate opportunity for
maven repo OBR)?
Posted by Steven Siebert <sm...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Guillaume. This nugget will probably prove quite useful in producing
the fragments from an archiva scan!
Kind of on a side note:
A little research and I found that Apache Sling also has an OBR
implementation (perhaps it's shared/inherited from Felix...but I haven't
investigated this yet) called Bundle Resource Provider (currently in
incubator). So...we have Felix (the originator of the OBR), ACE, and Sling
all (at least on the service) seemingly implementing their own OBR. It's
kind of a 180 from getting an OBR view onto Archiva...but what of the
thought of at looking at the Felix OBR subproject to replace the ACE OBR
implementation? This way, I can have multiple OBRs I can bang against?
Actually, I start a new email thread about this, so it's easier to track.
S
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 3:01 AM, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, November 4, 2010, Marcel Offermans
> <ma...@luminis.nl> wrote:
> > Hello Steve,
> >
> > On 4 Nov 2010, at 17:08 , Steven Siebert wrote:
> >
> >> In previous discussions with Brett Porter (CC'ed) he I and I discussed
> >> working together on exposing the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repo
> through
> >> an OBR interface. In what we discussed this afternoon, I think there
> could
> >> be an opportunity to cross-pollinate across the projects, just based on
> the
> >> commonality (without looking at the code yet). I just spoke again to
> Brett,
> >> and before I forget, I figured I would send an email out on the subject.
> =)
> >
> > That definitely sounds interesting. The "OBR" that is included in ACE
> consists of a couple of bundles. By default we include these as part of the
> ACE server. They can also be deployed in a stand-alone OSGi framework.
> Option number three is not using them at all but instead hooking up to an
> external repository that exposes the same OBR metadata.
>
> >
> > ACE actually contains code that scans a directory and (re)generates OBR
> metadata based on its contents. Maybe that code could be used to do the same
> for the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repository?
>
> Actually, the Felix maven bundle plugin also has such code which is
> reusing Felix bundlerepository library to create the fragments of XML
> based on a given manifest object.
>
> >
> > Greetings, Marcel
> >
> >
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>
Re: Archiva interest in ACE (or: cross-pollinate opportunity for
maven repo OBR)?
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
On Thursday, November 4, 2010, Marcel Offermans
<ma...@luminis.nl> wrote:
> Hello Steve,
>
> On 4 Nov 2010, at 17:08 , Steven Siebert wrote:
>
>> In previous discussions with Brett Porter (CC'ed) he I and I discussed
>> working together on exposing the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repo through
>> an OBR interface. In what we discussed this afternoon, I think there could
>> be an opportunity to cross-pollinate across the projects, just based on the
>> commonality (without looking at the code yet). I just spoke again to Brett,
>> and before I forget, I figured I would send an email out on the subject. =)
>
> That definitely sounds interesting. The "OBR" that is included in ACE consists of a couple of bundles. By default we include these as part of the ACE server. They can also be deployed in a stand-alone OSGi framework. Option number three is not using them at all but instead hooking up to an external repository that exposes the same OBR metadata.
>
> ACE actually contains code that scans a directory and (re)generates OBR metadata based on its contents. Maybe that code could be used to do the same for the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repository?
Actually, the Felix maven bundle plugin also has such code which is
reusing Felix bundlerepository library to create the fragments of XML
based on a given manifest object.
>
> Greetings, Marcel
>
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Re: Archiva interest in ACE (or: cross-pollinate opportunity for
maven repo OBR)?
Posted by Steven Siebert <sm...@gmail.com>.
Premek,
Sorry for the delayed response =)
Yes, that will be necessary. Not only to support this break out, but also
for a requirement I have to support more than one OBR instance on the
provider (one of them actually being an archiva instance once I get an OBR
interface into archiva as Brett and I discussed at ApacheCon).
I'll submit an issue to formally solicit opinions from the project members
=). With hope, and a bit of time, I'll have my provisioning server
interfacing with Archiva as the OBR by the end of the weekend (fingers
crossed =).
Thanks!
Steve
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Premek Brada <br...@kiv.zcu.cz> wrote:
> On 5.11.2010 12:20, Steven Siebert wrote:
>
> Sounds right. Was thinking about moving at the interfaces for the OBR
> Store and Metadata into its own bundle(s) to keep the API and existing
> implementation separate. This may be overkill, though =)
>
>
> Actually, things are not as clean. Looking at the OBR Metadata activator,
> my student noted that it creates the "default" implementation of the
> file-based indexer as a service, which then (inadvertedly) gets inserted
> into any managed service depending on the MetadataGenerator. So creating
> and providing a different indexer will be a bit difficult.
>
> That could be a reason to splitting the two bundles into API and
> implementation bundles. How would such a split fit within the overall ACE
> design?
>
> Premek
>
>
>
>
> I see the export now...Netbeans 6.9 apparently doesn't understand bnd!
> (seriously?!?!) Not good....I'll need to check if there is already a plugin
> or look at quickly hack one together. At the mercy of tooling again! =)
>
> S
>
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 6:54 AM, Premek Brada <br...@kiv.zcu.cz> wrote:
>
>> Hi Steven,
>>
>>
>> On 5.11.2010 10:11, Steven Siebert wrote:
>>
>> Hi Premek,
>>
>> After reading Marcel's response, moving that code out into its own
>> bundle was pretty much my first thought. +1 =)
>>
>>
>> Nice to hear, thanks :)
>>
>>
>> After diving into the code last night, I noticed the OBR stuff is
>> encapsulated quite well in the the modules OBR Metadata (where the indexer
>> is), OBR Store, and OBR Servlet. If we would be able to pull this code out
>> and export the API for the store backend, I can create an adapter to deal
>> with the pluggable nature of Apache Jackrabbits FileStore. Once we do
>> this...I think we'll be in business.
>>
>>
>> The OBR storage module contains the OBR API (BundleStore iface) + its
>> file-based implementation, and the OBR metadata is able to generate OBR
>> repository index file for a given directory. It actually exposes the indexer
>> as a service. Is the BundleStore what you meant by the "store backend API"?
>>
>> So, if I understand it correctly, providing for another store would mean
>> creating its implementation (the adapter) of the BundleStore + another
>> indexer operating on top of that implementation, which the BundleStore impl
>> uses to generate the index file.
>>
>> Actually, looking at it, it seems there should be no need to pull any code
>> out. We could just have two separate bundles with new code and dependencies
>> on the OBR Storage and OBR Metadata bundles, to access the interfaces they
>> define.
>>
>> Not sure I haven't missed something. Does this look ok?
>>
>> Premek
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Premek Brada <br...@kiv.zcu.cz> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4.11.2010 22:18, Marcel Offermans wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello Steve,
>>>>
>>>> On 4 Nov 2010, at 17:08 , Steven Siebert wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In previous discussions with Brett Porter (CC'ed) he I and I discussed
>>>>> working together on exposing the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repo
>>>>> through
>>>>> an OBR interface. In what we discussed this afternoon, I think there
>>>>> could
>>>>> be an opportunity to cross-pollinate across the projects, just based on
>>>>> the
>>>>> commonality (without looking at the code yet). I just spoke again to
>>>>> Brett,
>>>>> and before I forget, I figured I would send an email out on the
>>>>> subject. =)
>>>>>
>>>> That definitely sounds interesting. The "OBR" that is included in ACE
>>>> consists of a couple of bundles. By default we include these as part of the
>>>> ACE server. They can also be deployed in a stand-alone OSGi framework.
>>>> Option number three is not using them at all but instead hooking up to an
>>>> external repository that exposes the same OBR metadata.
>>>>
>>>> ACE actually contains code that scans a directory and (re)generates OBR
>>>> metadata based on its contents. Maybe that code could be used to do the same
>>>> for the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repository?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Coincidentally, I had a discussion yesterday with a student of mine who
>>> is working on a diploma project using ACE OBR, which for our purposes would
>>> need the indexer core (that re-generates OBR metadata) to be extended. We
>>> thus thought of factoring the indexer code out into a separate
>>> bundle/service.
>>>
>>> Would such a refactoring help to use OBR interface with the archiva repo?
>>> If yes, we could offer some help.
>>>
>>> Premek
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Premek Brada (Ing et MSc, PhD)
>>> Lecturer in Software enginering, Webmaster
>>> Department of Computer Science and Engineering
>>> University of West Bohemia, Pilsen, CZ
>>> << brada at kiv.zcu.cz | www.kiv.zcu.cz/~brada/<http://www.kiv.zcu.cz/%7Ebrada/>| +420-377-63-2435>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Premek Brada (Ing et MSc, PhD)
>> Lecturer in Software enginering, Webmaster
>> Department of Computer Science and Engineering
>> University of West Bohemia, Pilsen, CZ
>> << brada at kiv.zcu.cz | www.kiv.zcu.cz/~brada/ <http://www.kiv.zcu.cz/%7Ebrada/> | +420-377-63-2435 >>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Premek Brada (Ing et MSc, PhD)
> Lecturer in Software enginering, Webmaster
> Department of Computer Science and Engineering
> University of West Bohemia, Pilsen, CZ
> << brada at kiv.zcu.cz | www.kiv.zcu.cz/~brada/ | +420-377-63-2435 >>
>
>
>
Re: Archiva interest in ACE (or: cross-pollinate opportunity for
maven repo OBR)?
Posted by Premek Brada <br...@kiv.zcu.cz>.
On 5.11.2010 12:20, Steven Siebert wrote:
> Sounds right. Was thinking about moving at the interfaces for the OBR
> Store and Metadata into its own bundle(s) to keep the API and existing
> implementation separate. This may be overkill, though =)
Actually, things are not as clean. Looking at the OBR Metadata
activator, my student noted that it creates the "default" implementation
of the file-based indexer as a service, which then (inadvertedly) gets
inserted into any managed service depending on the MetadataGenerator.
So creating and providing a different indexer will be a bit difficult.
That could be a reason to splitting the two bundles into API and
implementation bundles. How would such a split fit within the overall
ACE design?
Premek
>
> I see the export now...Netbeans 6.9 apparently doesn't understand bnd!
> (seriously?!?!) Not good....I'll need to check if there is already a
> plugin or look at quickly hack one together. At the mercy of tooling
> again! =)
>
> S
>
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 6:54 AM, Premek Brada <brada@kiv.zcu.cz
> <ma...@kiv.zcu.cz>> wrote:
>
> Hi Steven,
>
>
> On 5.11.2010 10:11, Steven Siebert wrote:
>> Hi Premek,
>>
>> After reading Marcel's response, moving that code out into its
>> own bundle was pretty much my first thought. +1 =)
>
> Nice to hear, thanks :)
>
>
>> After diving into the code last night, I noticed the OBR stuff is
>> encapsulated quite well in the the modules OBR Metadata (where
>> the indexer is), OBR Store, and OBR Servlet. If we would be able
>> to pull this code out and export the API for the store backend, I
>> can create an adapter to deal with the pluggable nature of Apache
>> Jackrabbits FileStore. Once we do this...I think we'll be in
>> business.
>
> The OBR storage module contains the OBR API (BundleStore iface) +
> its file-based implementation, and the OBR metadata is able to
> generate OBR repository index file for a given directory. It
> actually exposes the indexer as a service. Is the BundleStore what
> you meant by the "store backend API"?
>
> So, if I understand it correctly, providing for another store
> would mean creating its implementation (the adapter) of the
> BundleStore + another indexer operating on top of that
> implementation, which the BundleStore impl uses to generate the
> index file.
>
> Actually, looking at it, it seems there should be no need to pull
> any code out. We could just have two separate bundles with new
> code and dependencies on the OBR Storage and OBR Metadata bundles,
> to access the interfaces they define.
>
> Not sure I haven't missed something. Does this look ok?
>
> Premek
>
>
>
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Premek Brada <brada@kiv.zcu.cz
>> <ma...@kiv.zcu.cz>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>>
>> On 4.11.2010 22:18, Marcel Offermans wrote:
>>
>> Hello Steve,
>>
>> On 4 Nov 2010, at 17:08 , Steven Siebert wrote:
>>
>> In previous discussions with Brett Porter (CC'ed) he
>> I and I discussed
>> working together on exposing the archiva
>> jackrabbit-based maven repo through
>> an OBR interface. In what we discussed this
>> afternoon, I think there could
>> be an opportunity to cross-pollinate across the
>> projects, just based on the
>> commonality (without looking at the code yet). I
>> just spoke again to Brett,
>> and before I forget, I figured I would send an email
>> out on the subject. =)
>>
>> That definitely sounds interesting. The "OBR" that is
>> included in ACE consists of a couple of bundles. By
>> default we include these as part of the ACE server. They
>> can also be deployed in a stand-alone OSGi framework.
>> Option number three is not using them at all but instead
>> hooking up to an external repository that exposes the
>> same OBR metadata.
>>
>> ACE actually contains code that scans a directory and
>> (re)generates OBR metadata based on its contents. Maybe
>> that code could be used to do the same for the archiva
>> jackrabbit-based maven repository?
>>
>>
>> Coincidentally, I had a discussion yesterday with a student
>> of mine who is working on a diploma project using ACE OBR,
>> which for our purposes would need the indexer core (that
>> re-generates OBR metadata) to be extended. We thus thought
>> of factoring the indexer code out into a separate bundle/service.
>>
>> Would such a refactoring help to use OBR interface with the
>> archiva repo? If yes, we could offer some help.
>>
>> Premek
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Premek Brada (Ing et MSc, PhD)
>> Lecturer in Software enginering, Webmaster
>> Department of Computer Science and Engineering
>> University of West Bohemia, Pilsen, CZ
>> << brada at kiv.zcu.cz <http://kiv.zcu.cz> |
>> www.kiv.zcu.cz/~brada/ <http://www.kiv.zcu.cz/%7Ebrada/> |
>> +420-377-63-2435>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Premek Brada (Ing et MSc, PhD)
> Lecturer in Software enginering, Webmaster
> Department of Computer Science and Engineering
> University of West Bohemia, Pilsen, CZ
> << brada atkiv.zcu.cz <http://kiv.zcu.cz> |www.kiv.zcu.cz/~brada/ <http://www.kiv.zcu.cz/%7Ebrada/> | +420-377-63-2435>>
>
>
--
Premek Brada (Ing et MSc, PhD)
Lecturer in Software enginering, Webmaster
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
University of West Bohemia, Pilsen, CZ
<< brada at kiv.zcu.cz | www.kiv.zcu.cz/~brada/ | +420-377-63-2435>>
Re: Archiva interest in ACE (or: cross-pollinate opportunity for
maven repo OBR)?
Posted by Steven Siebert <sm...@gmail.com>.
Sounds right. Was thinking about moving at the interfaces for the OBR Store
and Metadata into its own bundle(s) to keep the API and existing
implementation separate. This may be overkill, though =)
I see the export now...Netbeans 6.9 apparently doesn't understand bnd!
(seriously?!?!) Not good....I'll need to check if there is already a plugin
or look at quickly hack one together. At the mercy of tooling again! =)
S
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 6:54 AM, Premek Brada <br...@kiv.zcu.cz> wrote:
> Hi Steven,
>
>
> On 5.11.2010 10:11, Steven Siebert wrote:
>
> Hi Premek,
>
> After reading Marcel's response, moving that code out into its own bundle
> was pretty much my first thought. +1 =)
>
>
> Nice to hear, thanks :)
>
>
> After diving into the code last night, I noticed the OBR stuff is
> encapsulated quite well in the the modules OBR Metadata (where the indexer
> is), OBR Store, and OBR Servlet. If we would be able to pull this code out
> and export the API for the store backend, I can create an adapter to deal
> with the pluggable nature of Apache Jackrabbits FileStore. Once we do
> this...I think we'll be in business.
>
>
> The OBR storage module contains the OBR API (BundleStore iface) + its
> file-based implementation, and the OBR metadata is able to generate OBR
> repository index file for a given directory. It actually exposes the indexer
> as a service. Is the BundleStore what you meant by the "store backend API"?
>
> So, if I understand it correctly, providing for another store would mean
> creating its implementation (the adapter) of the BundleStore + another
> indexer operating on top of that implementation, which the BundleStore impl
> uses to generate the index file.
>
> Actually, looking at it, it seems there should be no need to pull any code
> out. We could just have two separate bundles with new code and dependencies
> on the OBR Storage and OBR Metadata bundles, to access the interfaces they
> define.
>
> Not sure I haven't missed something. Does this look ok?
>
> Premek
>
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Steve
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Premek Brada <br...@kiv.zcu.cz> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>>
>> On 4.11.2010 22:18, Marcel Offermans wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Steve,
>>>
>>> On 4 Nov 2010, at 17:08 , Steven Siebert wrote:
>>>
>>> In previous discussions with Brett Porter (CC'ed) he I and I discussed
>>>> working together on exposing the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repo
>>>> through
>>>> an OBR interface. In what we discussed this afternoon, I think there
>>>> could
>>>> be an opportunity to cross-pollinate across the projects, just based on
>>>> the
>>>> commonality (without looking at the code yet). I just spoke again to
>>>> Brett,
>>>> and before I forget, I figured I would send an email out on the subject.
>>>> =)
>>>>
>>> That definitely sounds interesting. The "OBR" that is included in ACE
>>> consists of a couple of bundles. By default we include these as part of the
>>> ACE server. They can also be deployed in a stand-alone OSGi framework.
>>> Option number three is not using them at all but instead hooking up to an
>>> external repository that exposes the same OBR metadata.
>>>
>>> ACE actually contains code that scans a directory and (re)generates OBR
>>> metadata based on its contents. Maybe that code could be used to do the same
>>> for the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repository?
>>>
>>
>> Coincidentally, I had a discussion yesterday with a student of mine who
>> is working on a diploma project using ACE OBR, which for our purposes would
>> need the indexer core (that re-generates OBR metadata) to be extended. We
>> thus thought of factoring the indexer code out into a separate
>> bundle/service.
>>
>> Would such a refactoring help to use OBR interface with the archiva repo?
>> If yes, we could offer some help.
>>
>> Premek
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Premek Brada (Ing et MSc, PhD)
>> Lecturer in Software enginering, Webmaster
>> Department of Computer Science and Engineering
>> University of West Bohemia, Pilsen, CZ
>> << brada at kiv.zcu.cz | www.kiv.zcu.cz/~brada/<http://www.kiv.zcu.cz/%7Ebrada/>| +420-377-63-2435>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Premek Brada (Ing et MSc, PhD)
> Lecturer in Software enginering, Webmaster
> Department of Computer Science and Engineering
> University of West Bohemia, Pilsen, CZ
> << brada at kiv.zcu.cz | www.kiv.zcu.cz/~brada/ | +420-377-63-2435 >>
>
>
>
Re: Archiva interest in ACE (or: cross-pollinate opportunity for
maven repo OBR)?
Posted by Premek Brada <br...@kiv.zcu.cz>.
Hi Steven,
On 5.11.2010 10:11, Steven Siebert wrote:
> Hi Premek,
>
> After reading Marcel's response, moving that code out into its own
> bundle was pretty much my first thought. +1 =)
Nice to hear, thanks :)
> After diving into the code last night, I noticed the OBR stuff is
> encapsulated quite well in the the modules OBR Metadata (where the
> indexer is), OBR Store, and OBR Servlet. If we would be able to pull
> this code out and export the API for the store backend, I can create
> an adapter to deal with the pluggable nature of Apache Jackrabbits
> FileStore. Once we do this...I think we'll be in business.
The OBR storage module contains the OBR API (BundleStore iface) + its
file-based implementation, and the OBR metadata is able to generate OBR
repository index file for a given directory. It actually exposes the
indexer as a service. Is the BundleStore what you meant by the "store
backend API"?
So, if I understand it correctly, providing for another store would mean
creating its implementation (the adapter) of the BundleStore + another
indexer operating on top of that implementation, which the BundleStore
impl uses to generate the index file.
Actually, looking at it, it seems there should be no need to pull any
code out. We could just have two separate bundles with new code and
dependencies on the OBR Storage and OBR Metadata bundles, to access the
interfaces they define.
Not sure I haven't missed something. Does this look ok?
Premek
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Steve
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Premek Brada <brada@kiv.zcu.cz
> <ma...@kiv.zcu.cz>> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
>
> On 4.11.2010 22:18, Marcel Offermans wrote:
>
> Hello Steve,
>
> On 4 Nov 2010, at 17:08 , Steven Siebert wrote:
>
> In previous discussions with Brett Porter (CC'ed) he I and
> I discussed
> working together on exposing the archiva jackrabbit-based
> maven repo through
> an OBR interface. In what we discussed this afternoon, I
> think there could
> be an opportunity to cross-pollinate across the projects,
> just based on the
> commonality (without looking at the code yet). I just
> spoke again to Brett,
> and before I forget, I figured I would send an email out
> on the subject. =)
>
> That definitely sounds interesting. The "OBR" that is included
> in ACE consists of a couple of bundles. By default we include
> these as part of the ACE server. They can also be deployed in
> a stand-alone OSGi framework. Option number three is not using
> them at all but instead hooking up to an external repository
> that exposes the same OBR metadata.
>
> ACE actually contains code that scans a directory and
> (re)generates OBR metadata based on its contents. Maybe that
> code could be used to do the same for the archiva
> jackrabbit-based maven repository?
>
>
> Coincidentally, I had a discussion yesterday with a student of
> mine who is working on a diploma project using ACE OBR, which for
> our purposes would need the indexer core (that re-generates OBR
> metadata) to be extended. We thus thought of factoring the
> indexer code out into a separate bundle/service.
>
> Would such a refactoring help to use OBR interface with the
> archiva repo? If yes, we could offer some help.
>
> Premek
>
>
>
> --
> Premek Brada (Ing et MSc, PhD)
> Lecturer in Software enginering, Webmaster
> Department of Computer Science and Engineering
> University of West Bohemia, Pilsen, CZ
> << brada at kiv.zcu.cz <http://kiv.zcu.cz> |
> www.kiv.zcu.cz/~brada/ <http://www.kiv.zcu.cz/%7Ebrada/> |
> +420-377-63-2435>>
>
>
--
Premek Brada (Ing et MSc, PhD)
Lecturer in Software enginering, Webmaster
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
University of West Bohemia, Pilsen, CZ
<< brada at kiv.zcu.cz | www.kiv.zcu.cz/~brada/ | +420-377-63-2435>>
Re: Archiva interest in ACE (or: cross-pollinate opportunity for
maven repo OBR)?
Posted by Steven Siebert <sm...@gmail.com>.
Hi Premek,
After reading Marcel's response, moving that code out into its own bundle
was pretty much my first thought. +1 =)
After diving into the code last night, I noticed the OBR stuff is
encapsulated quite well in the the modules OBR Metadata (where the indexer
is), OBR Store, and OBR Servlet. If we would be able to pull this code out
and export the API for the store backend, I can create an adapter to deal
with the pluggable nature of Apache Jackrabbits FileStore. Once we do
this...I think we'll be in business.
Thoughts?
Thanks!
Steve
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Premek Brada <br...@kiv.zcu.cz> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
>
> On 4.11.2010 22:18, Marcel Offermans wrote:
>
>> Hello Steve,
>>
>> On 4 Nov 2010, at 17:08 , Steven Siebert wrote:
>>
>> In previous discussions with Brett Porter (CC'ed) he I and I discussed
>>> working together on exposing the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repo
>>> through
>>> an OBR interface. In what we discussed this afternoon, I think there
>>> could
>>> be an opportunity to cross-pollinate across the projects, just based on
>>> the
>>> commonality (without looking at the code yet). I just spoke again to
>>> Brett,
>>> and before I forget, I figured I would send an email out on the subject.
>>> =)
>>>
>> That definitely sounds interesting. The "OBR" that is included in ACE
>> consists of a couple of bundles. By default we include these as part of the
>> ACE server. They can also be deployed in a stand-alone OSGi framework.
>> Option number three is not using them at all but instead hooking up to an
>> external repository that exposes the same OBR metadata.
>>
>> ACE actually contains code that scans a directory and (re)generates OBR
>> metadata based on its contents. Maybe that code could be used to do the same
>> for the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repository?
>>
>
> Coincidentally, I had a discussion yesterday with a student of mine who is
> working on a diploma project using ACE OBR, which for our purposes would
> need the indexer core (that re-generates OBR metadata) to be extended. We
> thus thought of factoring the indexer code out into a separate
> bundle/service.
>
> Would such a refactoring help to use OBR interface with the archiva repo?
> If yes, we could offer some help.
>
> Premek
>
>
>
> --
> Premek Brada (Ing et MSc, PhD)
> Lecturer in Software enginering, Webmaster
> Department of Computer Science and Engineering
> University of West Bohemia, Pilsen, CZ
> << brada at kiv.zcu.cz | www.kiv.zcu.cz/~brada/ | +420-377-63-2435>>
>
>
Re: Archiva interest in ACE (or: cross-pollinate opportunity for
maven repo OBR)?
Posted by Premek Brada <br...@kiv.zcu.cz>.
Hello all,
On 4.11.2010 22:18, Marcel Offermans wrote:
> Hello Steve,
>
> On 4 Nov 2010, at 17:08 , Steven Siebert wrote:
>
>> In previous discussions with Brett Porter (CC'ed) he I and I discussed
>> working together on exposing the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repo through
>> an OBR interface. In what we discussed this afternoon, I think there could
>> be an opportunity to cross-pollinate across the projects, just based on the
>> commonality (without looking at the code yet). I just spoke again to Brett,
>> and before I forget, I figured I would send an email out on the subject. =)
> That definitely sounds interesting. The "OBR" that is included in ACE consists of a couple of bundles. By default we include these as part of the ACE server. They can also be deployed in a stand-alone OSGi framework. Option number three is not using them at all but instead hooking up to an external repository that exposes the same OBR metadata.
>
> ACE actually contains code that scans a directory and (re)generates OBR metadata based on its contents. Maybe that code could be used to do the same for the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repository?
Coincidentally, I had a discussion yesterday with a student of mine who
is working on a diploma project using ACE OBR, which for our purposes
would need the indexer core (that re-generates OBR metadata) to be
extended. We thus thought of factoring the indexer code out into a
separate bundle/service.
Would such a refactoring help to use OBR interface with the archiva
repo? If yes, we could offer some help.
Premek
--
Premek Brada (Ing et MSc, PhD)
Lecturer in Software enginering, Webmaster
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
University of West Bohemia, Pilsen, CZ
<< brada at kiv.zcu.cz | www.kiv.zcu.cz/~brada/ | +420-377-63-2435>>
Re: Archiva interest in ACE (or: cross-pollinate opportunity for maven repo OBR)?
Posted by Marcel Offermans <ma...@luminis.nl>.
Hello Steve,
On 4 Nov 2010, at 17:08 , Steven Siebert wrote:
> In previous discussions with Brett Porter (CC'ed) he I and I discussed
> working together on exposing the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repo through
> an OBR interface. In what we discussed this afternoon, I think there could
> be an opportunity to cross-pollinate across the projects, just based on the
> commonality (without looking at the code yet). I just spoke again to Brett,
> and before I forget, I figured I would send an email out on the subject. =)
That definitely sounds interesting. The "OBR" that is included in ACE consists of a couple of bundles. By default we include these as part of the ACE server. They can also be deployed in a stand-alone OSGi framework. Option number three is not using them at all but instead hooking up to an external repository that exposes the same OBR metadata.
ACE actually contains code that scans a directory and (re)generates OBR metadata based on its contents. Maybe that code could be used to do the same for the archiva jackrabbit-based maven repository?
Greetings, Marcel