[jboss-dev] OSGi removed from 'all' profile

[Thomas Diesler]

As of yesterday we had osgi part of the 'all' profile and a separate 
'osgi' profile. The idea was that integration issues with osgi would 
show up early in the 'all' testsuite and I can have osgi smoke tests as 
part of the smoke-tests target. The osgi profile would only contain 
services that are (at least to some degree) integrated with osgi. i.e. 
TM is, EJB3 is not

For a better understanding, are users really running the 'all' profile? 
I thought this was more a 'pick and choose' repository of stuff.

My own QA installs osgi in 'default' and runs 90+ tests on it. It would 
however not detect that the osgi installation breaks EJB3 tests.

I guess we have two options

#1 install osgi in 'all' and integrate it in smoke-tests and all-tests. 
So we always know that osgi works together with all the other stuff. 
Additionally we could distribute a stripped down 'osgi' profile.

#2 install osgi in its own profile only. Only osgi functionality is 
tested there and we move bits in there over time that actually have 
integration and test coverage.

Both would work work for me.

cheers
-thomas

On 04/09/2010 11:11 AM, Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
> Although a separate 'osgi' profile/config increases the distro size, I 
> think too, it's better to have it separate from 'all'.
>
> If you include it in 'all', it will increase the already long boot 
> time, and the functionality will get lost together with everything 
> else that is already there. Also 'all' is usually the base for EAP 
> 'production' and we might not want to offer full OSGi support, as yet.
>
> On the other hand, having it separately, makes it stand out and will 
> trigger more people to try it out, start experimenting with it and 
> provide feedback. When at a later time, JBoss-OSGi becomes more 
> integrated with the other subsystems (EJB3, etc.) we might re-consider.
>
> I would even suggest that at some point we drop the 'minimal' config 
> in favor of 'osgi', in the sense that if people want a bare runtime to 
> write server extensions, they might be better off going with the OSGi 
> standard.
>
> My 0.02c
>
> Thomas Diesler wrote:
>> Hi Jason,
>>
>> I see that you removed OSGi from the 'all' profile. Were there any 
>> specific issues with it? I couldn't find pointers to why this was 
>> necessary.
>>
>> I reopened https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBAS-7661 where I make 
>> a comment on why I think osgi should be part of the 'all' profile. I 
>> am now working on osgi smoke tests that I ultimate want to run 
>> against 'all' as part of the smoke-tests target.
>>
>> cheers
>> -thomas
>>

-- 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thomas Diesler
JBoss OSGi Lead
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx