<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<tt>The problem is also with Phase.REGISTER, which is an awkward
name because Phase.INSTALL (which captures the meaning) was
already taken<br>
<br>
Phase.*MODULE* is </tt><tt>awkward because a Module may not be
present - this is increasingly so because we support a wider range
of OSGi bundle deployments (e.g. jdbc drivers and other 3rd party
artefacts get distributed as bundles)</tt><br>
<tt><br>
Phase.INSTALL is </tt><tt>awkward (as you say) because according
to the OSGi standard it means "install", but don't
resolve/activate. In AS7 it means "activate"<br>
<br>
-thomas</tt><br>
<tt><br>
</tt>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 07/26/2012 10:55 PM, Ondřej Žižka
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:1343336111.11898.674.camel@ondra-redhat"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="GtkHTML/3.30.3">
<br>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<pre>is that Phase.INSTALL is confusing with the OSGi meaning of INSTALL. I
always have to use many words when I talk about 'install' in AS7. Now
that we support war,ejb3,cdi deployments as OSGi bundles this is even
more so.
</pre>
</blockquote>
How about just renaming INSTALL -> ACTIVATE, would that work?<br>
I just started learning the AS lifecycles, so I don't really know,
but the current naming seemed logical to me, and OSGi would not
help me to understand the process much if it was in place...<br>
<br>
my2c
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thomas Diesler
JBoss OSGi Lead
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
</pre>
</body>
</html>